The expected value and variance under quota share reinsurance follow by scaling the exponential distribution:
The retained stop loss moments for an exponential aggregate follow from the payout , its survival function equals for and zero for . The tail integral formula for moments gives, with and ,
Consequently the retained moments are
Matching the two expected values forces , which lies strictly between zero and one. The difference of the variances simplifies to
Indeed has and for . Because , the difference is actually positive. At equal retained expected value, aggregate stop loss reinsurance reduces the variance more than quota share reinsurance.
Write and . Their common expected value is . Expanding about the retention gives the requested variance identity
The stop loss variance minimization principle follows from a pointwise comparison. For , the constraint implies
For , the squared distance of from is zero, so the same squared-distance comparison is immediate. Therefore
Subtracting the same proves optimality of the retained stop loss payout:
Since is bounded, its variance is finite; if , the inequality remains valid with infinite variance on the left. When it is finite, equality requires almost surely, because the pointwise squared-distance inequality is strict whenever the two payouts differ.
Use for the premium income rate, reserving later for the smaller exponential decay rate. In the classical risk model, the surplus is
Here is the relative safety loading. The aggregate claims form a Compound Poisson process. Define , so ruin occurs when . By independent increments and the exponential formula for a marked Poisson sum,
Thus is a nonnegative continuous-time martingale with , because the adjustment coefficient makes the exponent vanish.
Let . Apply the optional stopping theorem at the bounded stopping time . On , , so
Letting increase proves the Lundberg inequality and the unscaled limit:
For the precise asymptotic, put
The given exponential integral identity makes a probability density. Multiplying the given defective renewal equation by turns it into the ordinary renewal equation
For clarity, the version of the key renewal theorem used here is: if the interarrival law is nonarithmetic, has mean , and is directly Riemann integrable, the locally bounded solution of this renewal equation satisfies . The infinite-mean version gives zero for nonnegative directly Riemann integrable .
All the hypotheses can be checked here. The density gives a nonarithmetic distribution. The Tonelli theorem gives
Furthermore
Thus is continuous and integrable, and . On a mesh of width , the difference between its upper and lower sums is at most ; its upper sum is at most . This proves direct Riemann integrability rather than assuming it. Also by the Lundberg inequality, so the solution is locally bounded. Its renewal representation is , where and ; the residual after iteration tends to zero on compact intervals because sums of positive interarrivals tend to infinity.
Writing , the tilted interarrival expected value is . The key renewal theorem gives the Cramér–Lundberg ruin asymptotic
If , the same formula is interpreted as . A positive finite asymptotic constant requires ; this extra integrability is not explicitly stated in the paper.
For the final two-exponential case, evaluate the defective renewal equation at zero:
One can identify the adjustment coefficient without silently assuming . For , set
It is finite and positive. Integrating the nonnegative terms of the defective renewal equation, using the Tonelli theorem, first shows that is finite and then gives
As , because . By monotone convergence theorem, . The integrated tail distribution in the classical risk model has density , so by the tail integral formula for moments. Hence solves the adjustment equation, and its stipulated uniqueness implies . Finally the displayed form of gives the remaining constants
In particular the decay exponent and the coefficient do not affect or . The in these final answers is the printed decay rate, not .
In the Bühlmann model, a latent risk parameter is drawn from a population distribution. Conditional on , the yearly observations are independent and identically distributed random variables, with conditional expectation and conditional variance . Define the structural parameters
Here is the expected process variance, while is the variance of hypothetical means. The Bühlmann credibility premium is the best affine estimate of from the observed claims, under mean squared error. Predicting the next claim gives the same affine estimate: the extra conditional observation noise contributes the constant to the prediction error.
The law of total variance and conditional independence give
An affine estimate can be written as : for any chosen , optimizing the constant makes its expected value equal to . The normal equations for the linear least-squares projection are
For they force all to agree, with . Thus the credibility factor and premium are
The credibility factor increases with the observation count and between-risk variance, and decreases with within-risk variance. If , the risk mean is known and ; if and , one observation reveals it and . If both vanish, the premium is the fixed value and the factor is immaterial.
In the specified model, the conditional law is a gamma distribution with shape and scale . Therefore
The prior is an inverse-gamma distribution with shape and scale . To obtain its moments directly, substitute in the defining integral, obtaining
The Gamma function recurrence yields
The assumption makes both structural variances finite. Hence
It follows that the model-specific credibility estimate is
For the Bayes estimator under squared error loss, the quantity to estimate is , so the optimum is its posterior mean. The likelihood function, viewed as a function of , is proportional to
Multiplication by the prior shows gamma scale inverse-gamma conjugacy:
Although the printed hint only mentions integer shapes, the same substitution and Gamma integral normalize this posterior for every positive real shape, so no integrality of is needed. Its posterior mean gives the Bayesian estimate and comparison
This exact Bühlmann credibility for gamma claims holds for every observed sample, not merely on average. Here the posterior mean is affine in the sample mean, so the best affine Bühlmann credibility premium is also the unrestricted Bayes estimator under squared error loss.
The expected values of early and late new diagnosis counts at step are
Each summand in corresponds to an infection that avoids early diagnosis, enters the non-early state one step later, remains there for the intervening steps and is then diagnosed. Define for , and take an empty sum as zero. The early share of diagnosis intensity is
It is defined only when ; in particular there are no diagnoses at step 1 under the initial condition. With infection counts following a Poisson distribution and independent marking, early and late diagnosis counts in a fixed interval are independent Poisson random variables. Conditional on a positive total, the early count has a binomial distribution given the total with probability , so this ratio also equals the expectation of the observed early fraction conditional on a nonzero total. Without that conditioning a sample fraction at zero diagnoses is undefined.
A noncausal stationary autoregression exists. On the two-sided time axis define
This series converges in the sense of mean-square convergence, and direct subtraction gives . The expected value and autocovariance are
Consequently this is a weakly stationary process and, by Gaussianity, a strictly stationary process. It is an example of noncausal stationary autoregression, since uses future noise. In particular, is correlated with , so the usual causal variance recursion is inapplicable. If an additional assumption required the driving noise to be independent of past observations, this solution would be excluded; that assumption is not stated here.
A stationary causal time series exists. The infinite moving-average representation
converges in the sense of mean-square convergence because the driving variables are independent random variables and . Shifting the series gives . Its expected value is zero and its autocovariance is
Thus it is a weakly stationary process; since the driving variables have a normal distribution, it is also a Gaussian process and a strictly stationary process. Throughout the stationarity discussion, take ; degenerate zero noise permits trivial constant solutions.
A weakly stationary process has finite second moments, a constant expected value , and covariance depending only on the time difference:
A strictly stationary process, also called strongly stationary, has every finite-dimensional probability distribution invariant under a common shift: for every finite choice of times and every shift , and have the same law. strict stationarity with finite second moments implies weak stationarity. weak stationarity alone does not determine the full joint law, and strict stationarity alone does not guarantee finite moments.
First justify the dependence structure rather than assume that adjacent squares behave like an ordinary lag-one ARCH model. Write . Iterating its nonnegative recurrence gives
The product coefficient has expected value , so it tends to zero in probability. The stationary are a tight family; consequently the remainder tends to zero in probability, without needing independence between that remainder's factors. The increasing partial sums therefore give the representation
This proves the parity decomposition of a lag-two ARCH process: even and odd observations are functions of disjoint noise families. It also shows that the positive scale is a function of past noise, independent of . The conditional expectation of given past noise is zero, and the second-moment recursion is . independence of the parity families gives the adjacent-square covariance. Thus
To establish finiteness of the fourth moment before using its recursion, note that the norm of the th term in the positive series for is . The triangle inequality in L2 space makes the series square-integrable when . independence of the current noise and past scale then yields
and hence
If , a finite would make , which is impossible. Its fourth moment is then infinite. The adjacent-square product remains integrable by parity independence, even in that case.
A convenient general-state-space ergodic theorem is the following. For a positive Harris recurrent Markov chain with invariant probability measure , and a measurable function with ,
Here is the stationary expected value. Harris recurrence means that every set of positive irreducibility measure is visited almost surely from every state; positive recurrence supplies an invariant probability rather than only an infinite invariant measure. The ergodic theorem for a positive Harris recurrent Markov chain holds from any starting state under these Harris hypotheses. aperiodicity is not necessary just for averages.
A useful sufficient form of the central limit theorem for a geometrically ergodic Markov chain adds aperiodicity, geometric ergodicity, and for some . It gives
These are sufficient hypotheses, not a claim that irreducibility alone ensures a central limit theorem. The Markov chain Monte Carlo asymptotic variance uses stationary covariances , with . The series is absolutely convergent under the stated sufficient assumptions. If , write and , where the integrated autocorrelation time is . When , the effective sample size of a Markov chain is approximately . Negative correlations can reduce the asymptotic variance; a zero asymptotic variance gives a degenerate normal limit. For constant , variance is zero and the autocorrelation normalization is undefined.
Apply the Monte Carlo estimator to the observable :
The theoretical justification is the ergodic theorem for a positive Harris recurrent Markov chain, not an independent-sample law of large numbers. The Markov chain has finite state space, is irreducible, and has the strictly positive posterior distribution as invariant law, so it is positive recurrent and Harris recurrent with counting measure. The observable is bounded: . Thus the estimator converges almost surely to the posterior expected value from any initial configuration.
Each state also has positive self-transition probability, so the chain is an aperiodic Markov chain. Finiteness then gives geometric convergence and the relevant central limit theorem; serial dependence determines the Markov chain Monte Carlo asymptotic variance if error bars are required. A fixed finite burn-in can be discarded without changing consistency, but independence of the retained states should not be assumed.
Think of a vertex of this hypergraph as an edge of the complete graph on . A hyperedge is the edge set of one -vertex clique. A fixed pair belongs to a clique precisely when its other vertices are chosen from the remaining , giving
For a set of graph edges, let be the number of their distinct endpoints. If , no -clique contains them and the codegree is zero. Otherwise its other vertices may be chosen freely, so
For , distinct edges have at least three endpoints, and all edges lie among the possible pairs. Thus and . In particular,
This also identifies why the relevant exponent is .
For fixed and , the ratio of the two binomial coefficients satisfies for all sufficiently large , with one constant valid for every . For ,
For any fixed , choose so large that the last bound is at most for every . Zero codegrees satisfy the bound automatically. The asserted small-codegree condition therefore holds uniformly. Its domain is the nonsingleton sets considered above: for a singleton, , so the assertion with arbitrary would be false.
A family of hypergraph containers is a collection of vertex subsets such that every hypergraph independent set of the hypergraph is contained in some . Here a hypergraph independent set is exactly the edge set of a -free graph on .
We use the following edge-sparse form of the hypergraph container theorem. For fixed uniformity and , there are constants such that an -uniform hypergraph on vertices with positive average hypergraph vertex degree , sufficiently small, and
has a family covering its hypergraph independent sets with
One obtains this form by iterating a degree-measure hypergraph container theorem, recording small container fingerprints at each step. To ensure the requested strict edge inequality, apply it with .
For our clique hypergraph, , and . The established codegree bound permits this choice of , and
Every container, viewed as an ordinary graph, has at most copies of .
We also use clique supersaturation: for each fixed , graphs with at least edges have at least copies of , for some and all sufficiently large . For clarity, this follows already from the Erdős-Stone theorem: choose a fixed sample size with . A uniformly sampled -set has expected value of the edge count above this bound by at least , forcing a positive proportion of samples to contain a clique. Counting each clique's extensions to -sets then gives the claimed bound.
Choose smaller than the corresponding supersaturation constant after converting to . Each container has fewer than ordinary edges. Every -free graph is a subgraph of one of these containers, so their number is at most
Conversely, every subgraph of a balanced Turan graph with parts is -free, giving at least possibilities. Letting be arbitrarily small proves the enumeration formula:
Write . Besides Talagrand's convex distance inequality, we use the precise squared edge bound for tours in the unit square stated above and the triangle inequality, which permits shortcutting a closed walk without increasing its length. We first prove the geometric comparison that connects these results.
For each fixed , choose a cyclic tour with edge lengths satisfying . At vertex , let be the sum of the lengths of its two incident edges in . The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives
We claim the weighted mismatch bound for Euclidean tours:
To prove it, keep the vertices whose coordinates agree. In the cyclic ordering , the deleted vertices split into consecutive runs between kept vertices. For one run, let denote its two boundary edge lengths and the sum of its internal edge lengths. Starting at the left kept endpoint, visit the run and return along the same path, at cost ; starting at the right endpoint costs . Choose the cheaper detour. Its cost is at most
which is exactly the sum of over that run. Attach these detours to a shortest tour through , which already visits every kept point. The resulting closed walk visits all points of ; shortcut it using the triangle inequality. Summing the detour costs proves the claimed weighted mismatch bound for Euclidean tours. If there is just one kept vertex, the same argument uses that vertex as both endpoints of the unique run. If there are no kept vertices, proves the comparison directly. Repeated point locations cause no difficulty, since their connecting edges may have length zero.
Let be any median of and set . For , the weighted mismatch bound for Euclidean tours implies
The weights have squared sum at most one, so . Since , Talagrand's convex distance inequality yields
For the lower tail, put . If there is nothing to prove. For every with , apply the same weighted mismatch bound for Euclidean tours with its weights and all . It gives . The set of such has probability at least , so Talagrand's convex distance inequality instead gives
Combining both tails,
The bound has a constant fluctuation scale, independent of . Only independence of the point coordinates and their support in the square are needed here; their uniform distribution was needed for the earlier lower bound on the expected value.
Interpret as the length of a shortest Euclidean travelling salesman tour, and take the points to be independent random variables with the uniform distribution on the square. We assume ; a closed tour on one point has length zero, so the printed lower bound would be false for . For two points the closed tour traverses the joining segment twice.
For the deterministic upper bound, use the following precise geometric result, the squared edge bound for tours in the unit square: every finite set of points in admits a cyclic ordering such that
Here is a proof of that geometric result. First consider a right triangle with hypotenuse endpoints , hypotenuse length , and right-angle vertex . The quadratic path bound in a right triangle supplies a path from to through any finite set inside the triangle whose sum of squared edge lengths is at most . For an empty set use the edge . For a single point , use : the triangle lies in the disk with diameter , so and the law of cosines gives .
For several points, draw the altitude from to the hypotenuse. It splits the triangle into two smaller right triangles with hypotenuses and . Their squared hypotenuse lengths sum to by the Pythagorean theorem. Repeated altitude subdivision eventually makes every cell small enough to contain at most one of the given distinct points: each child is similar to the original triangle and its diameter contracts by at most the fixed factor . Construct the base-case paths and combine them from the bottom of this finite subdivision tree. The two child paths concatenate at . If is an auxiliary point, delete it by joining its two neighbours directly. Both neighbours lie in the right-angle sector of the parent triangle at , so their angle at is at most . The law of cosines now shows that this shortcut does not increase the sum of squared edge lengths. The combined path still has endpoints and squared cost at most .
One can first put the given points in generic positions, avoiding subdivision boundaries, and then pass to a limit. There are only finitely many possible visiting orders, so a subsequence keeps the same order and its squared cost converges; this also handles coincident locations. No assumption about a minimum separation remains in the result.
Split the square along a diagonal . Apply the triangle result in each half, following one path from to and the other back to . Each half contributes at most . Remove either diagonal endpoint if it was auxiliary. At a square corner all neighbours lie in a sector of angle , so the same squared-cost shortcut applies. This gives the asserted cyclic ordering with total squared cost at most four. It does not assert that the tour minimizing ordinary length itself has this squared-edge property. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality applied to the tour supplied by the theorem proves
Thus the upper bound is deterministic, independently of the sampling law.
For the lower bound, put , the nearest neighbour distance at . Both edges incident to in any closed tour have length at least . Summing over vertices and then dividing by two gives . Conditional on , the union bound and the uniform distribution give
Boundary clipping only makes the ball smaller. Apply the layer-cake representation of the expected value, restricting the integral to :
Linearity of the expected value now yields
The unspecified sampling phrase in the paper must therefore be understood as independent uniform sampling: an arbitrary distribution concentrated in a tiny region cannot satisfy this lower bound.
Let count the copies of the complete graph in the binomial random graph . By linearity of the expected value and independence of distinct edges,
Throughout, is sufficiently large that . We have , and .
First, since ,
The first moment method proves .
For the existence of a -clique, put and . Since ,
This alone is insufficient: we must control the variance via the overlap formula for the variance of a clique count. Let indicate that a given -set spans a clique. If , the two copies share edges, so
For their edge sets are disjoint and the covariance vanishes, even when they share one vertex. Counting ordered pairs of -sets gives the exact formula
This includes the diagonal case .
To bound the overlap factor, regard it as the probability that a uniformly chosen -set intersects a fixed in exactly vertices. A union bound over the possible specified -subsets of yields
Here is a falling factorial, and the last bound holds for . Therefore
For , the concave quadratic is minimized at an endpoint. Its endpoint values are and , both at least . Thus every power of in the last sum is at most , and
because the logarithm of its numerator is . The second moment method, or Chebyshev's inequality directly, gives . Finally, every larger clique contains a -clique, so the absence of excludes all larger sizes. The clique number is exactly with high probability:
Write and , restricting to meshes small enough that . This discontinuous indicator function does not satisfy the hypothesis of part (b). Instead apply part (a) with and handle its two boundary cells directly.
Let on each observation cell . Away from cells containing the two ends of , almost everywhere. Even if an endpoint is itself an observation time, at most two cells contribute, and their total length is at most . Thus the quadrature error obeys
The fluctuation has variance at most . Its zero expected value gives
using .
Figure 1.
Only the two endpoint cells contribute to the window quadrature error
.
The remaining bias is the difference between an interval average and the spot variance. By the Hölder continuity of ,
Retaining the centered fluctuation and bounding yields
For , both and equal . Therefore and satisfy both requested bounds:
The constants are independent of the observation partition, , and . The exponent follows from a bias-variance tradeoff for a shrinking window.
The empirical characteristic function replaces the expected value in a characteristic function by the sample average:
Its centered fluctuation at the central limit theorem scale is the empirical characteristic process:
In particular, and .
Put and . Use the scan statistic and the statistical hypothesis testing rule
The union bound and the Hoeffding inequality give , since . Conditional on index , accepting the null hypothesis implies . The assumed separation gives , so this threshold lies more than below the alternative expected value . The lower-tail Hoeffding inequality therefore gives . Averaging the conditional error over the mixture model gives as well.
Because the scalar signal and the noise vector are independent random variables with normal distributions, their sum is a Gaussian random vector. Its expected value is zero, and the covariance matrix is
Thus this is a rank-one covariance spike. Each summand has expected value , so . Here the empirical matrix is an uncentered empirical second-moment matrix; because the population expected value is known to be zero, it is an unbiased estimator of the covariance matrix. The TeX's apparent factorial denominator is a transcription error.