0% found this document useful (0 votes)
27 views2 pages

E1 244 Detection & Estimation Theory Assignment

This document provides guidelines and problems for Assignment 6 of the course E1 244 - Detection and Estimation Theory. It includes: 1) General submission guidelines for assignments through Microsoft Teams by the due date of April 15, 2023. Late submissions will be penalized. 2) Four problems related to estimation theory, sufficient statistics, maximum likelihood estimation, Cramer-Rao lower bound, and best linear unbiased estimation. The problems involve concepts like Poisson distribution, mixture distributions, coin tossing, and log-normal distribution.

Uploaded by

samyak jain
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
27 views2 pages

E1 244 Detection & Estimation Theory Assignment

This document provides guidelines and problems for Assignment 6 of the course E1 244 - Detection and Estimation Theory. It includes: 1) General submission guidelines for assignments through Microsoft Teams by the due date of April 15, 2023. Late submissions will be penalized. 2) Four problems related to estimation theory, sufficient statistics, maximum likelihood estimation, Cramer-Rao lower bound, and best linear unbiased estimation. The problems involve concepts like Poisson distribution, mixture distributions, coin tossing, and log-normal distribution.

Uploaded by

samyak jain
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

E1 244 - Detection and Estimation Theory (Jan 2023)

Assignment 6 Due Date: April 15, 2023


Total Marks: 40

General Assignment Guidelines:


• Submission via Teams: Assignments will be allocated to you via the Teams “Assignments” feature. You
will have to upload your answer sheet via the same feature in Teams. Answer sheets sent to me or
the TAs by e-mail will not be considered. Please familiarize yourself with this feature.
• Late Submission Policy: Assignment submission beyond the deadline is allowed as per the below policy:

– Delay of 24 hours will attract 20% penalty


– Delay of 48 hours will attract 40% penalty
– Delay of 72 hours days will attract 60% penalty
– Assignments submitted beyond 72 hours will not be considered

The upload time reflected in the Teams will be considered as final. You are highly encouraged
to upload your answer sheets well before the deadline so that any potential connection/technical issues
can be resolved in time (recommended time is at least 1 hour before the deadline).
• File Logistics: You can scan your handwritten answers, or use a tablet, or typeset your answers in Latex.
Following logistics should be followed while uploading the answer sheet:

– Make sure your scans are properly visible. You can try using some scan apps (Ex. AdobeScan) to
get better results.
– The total file size should not be too large (ideally, less than 5 Mb). You can use available
apps/softwares to reduce the file size. Make sure that the answers are clearly visible while re-
ducing the size.
– Only a single pdf file is allowed to be uploaded (other formats will not be accepted).
– The order of answers in your file should be in the same as the order of questions. Check that you
have included all the pages in your file before uploading it.
– Name you file as: DET Assignmentx FirstName, where x is the assignment number (x=1,2,...)
– Mention your name, course name and submission date on the first page.
• Collaboration Policy: You are allowed to discuss the concepts/questions with your classmates. However,
the final answer should be as per your own understanding. Merely copying solutions from class-
mates/online sources will attract significant penalty and strict disciplinary action (refer to Section 13.2
and 13.3 of the IISc student information handbook - link). If you have collaborated/discussed with other
classmates or referred some online resource for a particular question, clearly mention the names of
the classmates/online resource at the beginning of your answer.

All questions carry equal marks but are not equally difficult, so you may want to strategize accordingly.

Problem 1 Let yk ∼ Poisson(θ) for k = 1, 2, · · · , N be i.i.d. random variables with θ > 0 being an unknown
parameter. We wish to estimate the parameter λ, where λ = e−θ .
PN
(a) Show that T (y) = k=1 yk is a sufficient statistics for estimating λ.
PN
(b) Show that λ̂1 (y) = N1 k=1 1{yk =0} is an unbiased estimator of λ.
T (y)
(c) Assuming T (y) is complete, show that λ̂2 (y) = NN−1 is an MVU estimator of λ.

Problem 2
(a) Let f1 and f2 be two pdfs with disjoint supports Ȳ1 and Ȳ2 . Consider the mixture distribution f (y; θ) =
θf1 (y) + (1 − θ)f2 (y), where θ ∈ [0, 1]. Use the Neyman-Fisher factorization theorem to show that T (y) =
1{y∈Ȳ1 } is a sufficient statistics for θ.
(b) Let yk be i.i.d. random variables for k = 1, 2 · · · , N , each with density f (yk ; x) = (x − 1)yk−x 1{yk ≥1} . Find
a sufficient statistics for x that is complete and justify your answer.

1
Problem 3 A coin is tossed independently N times and the observation yk is 1 if heads is observed, and 0
otherwise for k = 1, 2, · · · , N . Let p = Pr(yk = 1).
(a) Find the MVU estimate of p.
(b) Find the ML estimate of p and find its bias and covariance.
(c) Find the CRB and compare it with parts (a) and (b).

Problem 4 Let y1 , y2 , · · · , yN be i.i.d. observations with the log-normal pdf given by


1 2
e[− 2 (ln(yk )−θ) ] 1{yk ≥0} .
1
f (yk ; θ) = √
2πyk
We wish to compute the BLUE of θ.
(a) Show that the mean is e(θ+0.5) , and therefore, the unbiasedness constraint for BLUE cannot be satisfied.
(b) Use transformation of random variables zk = ln yk to find the BLUE of θ.

Common questions

Powered by AI

To determine if ˆλ2(y) is the MVU estimator for λ, we first need to show that the statistic T(y) = Σ yk is a complete sufficient statistic for the parameter λ based on the Poisson distribution property. Since ˆλ2(y) is a function of the complete statistic T(y), if it is unbiased, it is the MVU by Lehmann-Scheffé theorem. The unbiasedness constraint is satisfied by proving E[ˆλ2(y)] = λ, using the properties of Poisson distribution, where ˆλ2(y) = (N−1)/N * T(y).

The unbiasedness constraint for BLUE cannot be satisfied in estimating θ for log-normal PDF observations because the mean of log-normal distribution is not a linear function of θ. Specifically, the mean is e^(θ+0.5), which is a nonlinear function of θ. This indicates that the expected value of any linear combination of log-transformed observations can't equal θ directly, violating the linear unbiasedness condition for BLUE .

To evaluate the bias and covariance of the ML estimator of p for a coin toss, we first express the ML estimator p̂ as the sample mean of the observations. The bias of the ML estimator is the difference between its expectation and the true parameter p, calculated as E[p̂] - p, which is zero since p̂ is unbiased in this context. The covariance of p̂, which is a single parameter estimate, is evaluated as Var(p̂) = p(1−p)/N, where N is the total number of tosses, quantifying the estimator's random variability .

Scanned handwritten answers or digital typesetting (like LaTeX) are recommended because they enhance clarity and precision critical in technical subjects. Digital documents facilitate easier readability and alignment of equations, reducing misinterpretation risks. Such formats also comply with file logistics requirements, supporting clear, concise communication of complex solutions .

To find the BLUE of θ using transformations, the method of transforming the log-normal observations into normal ones is appropriate. By transforming yk using zk = ln(yk), the distribution becomes normal with mean θ and variance 1. This transformation allows the application of linear estimation techniques on zk to determine the BLUE of θ effectively, using properties of normal distributions .

The Cramer-Rao Bound (CRB) provides a lower bound on the variance of unbiased estimators of a parameter, serving as a benchmark for estimator efficiency. In the context of coin toss experiments for parameter p, the CRB is given by Var(MLE) ≥ 1/(N*p(1-p)), where N is the number of observations. An estimator is said to be efficient if its variance equals the CRB. For the ML estimator of p in a binomial setting, its variance p(1-p)/N meets the CRB, indicating maximum efficiency .

The collaboration policy supports discussion among peers on concepts but requires independent final work to maintain academic integrity, deterring plagiarism. If collaboration occurs, students must disclose partners or resources used in their answers to ensure transparency. Strict penalties for non-compliance emphasize the importance of originality, holding students accountable to ethical standards in academic submissions .

The Neyman-Fisher factorization theorem helps identify a sufficient statistic for a parameter by factorizing the joint distribution of the data into two parts: one involving the data only through the statistic and the other independent of the parameter. For the mixture distribution f(y; θ) = θf1(y) + (1−θ)f2(y), with disjoint supports ¯Y1 and ¯Y2, the theorem allows us to conclude that T(y) = 1{y∈¯Y1} is sufficient for θ because it captures all the information about θ contained in the data .

Students should familiarize themselves with the Teams upload feature well before the deadline and prepare their answer sheets according to specified guidelines. A key strategy would be to compile responses into a single PDF, properly named, and ensure visibility and file size adherence. Additionally, students should strategically plan to upload at least an hour before the deadline to mitigate the risk of technical issues, ensuring on-time submissions .

Strategically ordering problem-solving by difficulty allows students to allocate time and cognitive resources efficiently. Tackling easier problems first ensures that they secure some marks, preserving time and energy for more complex questions. This prioritization aligns efforts with score maximization goals under time constraints, as problems carry equal marks but vary in difficulty .

You might also like