Statistics: how to prove efficiency of a given estimator?












1












$begingroup$


So the question gave $D_1$ and $D_2$ as unbiased, efficient and consistent estimators of $delta$ . $D_3$ is a new estimator which is obtained by taking a weighted average of $D_1$ and $D_2$ with one quarter of the weight placed on $D_1$. Now, the question is can I prove that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator of $delta$?



I know for that for $D_3$ to be efficient, $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_1)$ and $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_2)$.



I also know that $$Var(D_3)=Var left(frac{1}{4D_1}+frac{3}{4D_2}right)$$



However, I'm not sure how to prove (or if it is even possible to prove) that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    So the question gave $D_1$ and $D_2$ as unbiased, efficient and consistent estimators of $delta$ . $D_3$ is a new estimator which is obtained by taking a weighted average of $D_1$ and $D_2$ with one quarter of the weight placed on $D_1$. Now, the question is can I prove that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator of $delta$?



    I know for that for $D_3$ to be efficient, $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_1)$ and $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_2)$.



    I also know that $$Var(D_3)=Var left(frac{1}{4D_1}+frac{3}{4D_2}right)$$



    However, I'm not sure how to prove (or if it is even possible to prove) that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      So the question gave $D_1$ and $D_2$ as unbiased, efficient and consistent estimators of $delta$ . $D_3$ is a new estimator which is obtained by taking a weighted average of $D_1$ and $D_2$ with one quarter of the weight placed on $D_1$. Now, the question is can I prove that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator of $delta$?



      I know for that for $D_3$ to be efficient, $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_1)$ and $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_2)$.



      I also know that $$Var(D_3)=Var left(frac{1}{4D_1}+frac{3}{4D_2}right)$$



      However, I'm not sure how to prove (or if it is even possible to prove) that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      So the question gave $D_1$ and $D_2$ as unbiased, efficient and consistent estimators of $delta$ . $D_3$ is a new estimator which is obtained by taking a weighted average of $D_1$ and $D_2$ with one quarter of the weight placed on $D_1$. Now, the question is can I prove that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator of $delta$?



      I know for that for $D_3$ to be efficient, $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_1)$ and $Var(D_3)$ has to be less than $Var(D_2)$.



      I also know that $$Var(D_3)=Var left(frac{1}{4D_1}+frac{3}{4D_2}right)$$



      However, I'm not sure how to prove (or if it is even possible to prove) that $D_3$ is an efficient estimator.







      statistics






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Jun 3 '16 at 21:19









      M47145

      3,27331130




      3,27331130










      asked May 3 '15 at 22:54









      NikitauNikitau

      610513




      610513






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0












          $begingroup$

          You can use the properties of variance so that Var(D3)=(1/16)Var(D1)+(9/16)Var(D2). To prove the efficiency, you could perhaps use the Cramer-Rao bound and fisher information.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 3 '15 at 23:52










          • $begingroup$
            Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
            $endgroup$
            – BruceET
            May 4 '15 at 2:46










          • $begingroup$
            Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 4 '15 at 14:46











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1265431%2fstatistics-how-to-prove-efficiency-of-a-given-estimator%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          0












          $begingroup$

          You can use the properties of variance so that Var(D3)=(1/16)Var(D1)+(9/16)Var(D2). To prove the efficiency, you could perhaps use the Cramer-Rao bound and fisher information.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 3 '15 at 23:52










          • $begingroup$
            Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
            $endgroup$
            – BruceET
            May 4 '15 at 2:46










          • $begingroup$
            Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 4 '15 at 14:46
















          0












          $begingroup$

          You can use the properties of variance so that Var(D3)=(1/16)Var(D1)+(9/16)Var(D2). To prove the efficiency, you could perhaps use the Cramer-Rao bound and fisher information.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 3 '15 at 23:52










          • $begingroup$
            Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
            $endgroup$
            – BruceET
            May 4 '15 at 2:46










          • $begingroup$
            Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 4 '15 at 14:46














          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          You can use the properties of variance so that Var(D3)=(1/16)Var(D1)+(9/16)Var(D2). To prove the efficiency, you could perhaps use the Cramer-Rao bound and fisher information.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          You can use the properties of variance so that Var(D3)=(1/16)Var(D1)+(9/16)Var(D2). To prove the efficiency, you could perhaps use the Cramer-Rao bound and fisher information.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered May 3 '15 at 23:07









          user153009user153009

          359211




          359211












          • $begingroup$
            Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 3 '15 at 23:52










          • $begingroup$
            Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
            $endgroup$
            – BruceET
            May 4 '15 at 2:46










          • $begingroup$
            Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 4 '15 at 14:46


















          • $begingroup$
            Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 3 '15 at 23:52










          • $begingroup$
            Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
            $endgroup$
            – BruceET
            May 4 '15 at 2:46










          • $begingroup$
            Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
            $endgroup$
            – Nikitau
            May 4 '15 at 14:46
















          $begingroup$
          Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
          $endgroup$
          – Nikitau
          May 3 '15 at 23:52




          $begingroup$
          Ah, I see. However, my syllabus doesn't cover the Cramer-Rao bound or the fisher information. Would there be any other way to prove efficiency?
          $endgroup$
          – Nikitau
          May 3 '15 at 23:52












          $begingroup$
          Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
          $endgroup$
          – BruceET
          May 4 '15 at 2:46




          $begingroup$
          Consider: (1) Variances don't add in this way unless $D_1$ and $D_2$ are independent, which is not necessarily so. (2) If they are independent, then $D_3$ has a smaller variance than $D_1$ or $D_2$. (3) No need to prove $D_1$ and $D_2$ are efficient because that is assumed. (4) If $D_1$ and $D_2$ are both efficient, they must have the same variance.
          $endgroup$
          – BruceET
          May 4 '15 at 2:46












          $begingroup$
          Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
          $endgroup$
          – Nikitau
          May 4 '15 at 14:46




          $begingroup$
          Ah, thanks so much! So would it be alright if I concluded that D3 is efficient if and only if D1 and D2 are independent? Thanks so much!
          $endgroup$
          – Nikitau
          May 4 '15 at 14:46


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1265431%2fstatistics-how-to-prove-efficiency-of-a-given-estimator%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Bressuire

          Cabo Verde

          Gyllenstierna