Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2015 iii Paper 34 1 b Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
To distinguish the random intensity from its possible values, write it as . Its law is a gamma distribution with shape and rate . HenceFor the Poisson mixture, conditional expectation and conditional variance both equal . The law of total expectation and the law of total variance yieldwhere . Applying the random sum of independent claims formulas with the exponential distribution of the claim sizes gives the portfolio B momentsAt the matched intensity , the expected value for portfolio A is also , whereas its variance is . Thus the expected totals agree, but mixing increases the variance:The extra term is precisely .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2015 iii Paper 34 1 c Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
Conditioning on the intensity in the Poisson mixture givesThus has the negative binomial distribution with two successes and success probability , counting failures; explicitly for . The probability generating function is finite for real .
The claim-size moment-generating function is . Substituting into the aggregate moment-generating function and using givesPut , the moment-generating function of an exponential distribution with rate . The identitythen yieldsThe gamma-mixed Poisson aggregate with exponential claims has three nonnegative mixture weights summing to one. By uniqueness of the moment-generating function near zero, the aggregate distribution isHere is the Dirac measure at zero. In particular , consistently with . The positive components have respective expected values and ; their mixture distribution accounts for the possibility of no aggregate payout.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 ii Paper 4 12J d Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-05
Under fit.2, observations in each period are independent Poisson random variables with a common mean, so each sample variance should fluctuate around its sample mean. The plot instead has variances roughly 130–300 for means roughly 80–120, well above the line variance equals mean. This is overdispersion.
Day-to-day traffic variation can produce a Poisson mixture: a random daily intensity increases the marginal variance and can correlate observations from the same day. A useful replacement is a negative binomial regression, with variance , or a Poisson generalized linear mixed model with a day random intercept. A day-factor effect can also be included if inference is restricted to the observed days. A Quasi-Poisson regression estimates a dispersion multiplier for uncertainty, but does not itself explain the shared-day dependence and has no ordinary likelihood-based AIC. The means can retain the period-factor or selected jump structure.