Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA/CAS Preliminary Exams > Exam 1/P - Probability
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Meet the Employees of DW Simpson
Patty Jacobsen Simpson, Bob Morand, Kristyn Sakelaris, Sean Loboda, KC Cho, Maureen Matous, Ellen Page
Aaron Benton, Becki Tobia, Kimberly Skora, Margit Vogele, Barclay Burns, Jason Blundy, Dan Karrow, Tom Troceen
Valorie Mulder, Marianne Westphal, Carol Lee, Jennifer Retford, Kieran Welsh-Phillips, Lindsey Nelson, Emily Paxton
Angie Wachholz, Derek Mulder, Julie Garwood, Caitlin Cunningham, David Benton, Dave Retford, Sarah Cleveland, Rhonda Glick
Genevieve Shannon, Meghan Bautista, Carol Datu, Barb Rave, Jesus Perez, Dan Kane, Chris Zdenek, Scott Simon, Kriss Wells


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-28-2012, 02:15 PM
oceankyle oceankyle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 154
Default Actex Problem Set 5 #13

This problem is pretty simple, but I'm a little confused on one of the concepts. I'm guessing its something simple also but...

It reads:

A company insures homes in three cities J, K, L. Since sufficient distance separates the cities, it is reasonable to assume that the losses occurring in these cities are independent. The moment generating functions for the loss distributions of the cities are .... (insert the MGFs here)

Let X represent the combined losses of the 3 cities. Calculate E[X^3]

The solution entails multiplying the 3 moment generating functions together than taking the third derivative and substituting 0 for t...

Ok, So my question is why are we multiplying the moment generating functions when we are looking for the combined loss? Shouldn't the solution involve the sum of the 3 expected values?

Also on page 145 it explains that you can find a moment generating function of a new variable by taking the weighted average of the moment generating functions of the variables you are combining.

I just don't quite understand the concept/difference here. thanks for any help.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-28-2012, 03:32 PM
Academic Actuary Academic Actuary is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceankyle View Post
This problem is pretty simple, but I'm a little confused on one of the concepts. I'm guessing its something simple also but...

It reads:

A company insures homes in three cities J, K, L. Since sufficient distance separates the cities, it is reasonable to assume that the losses occurring in these cities are independent. The moment generating functions for the loss distributions of the cities are .... (insert the MGFs here)

Let X represent the combined losses of the 3 cities. Calculate E[X^3]

The solution entails multiplying the 3 moment generating functions together than taking the third derivative and substituting 0 for t...

Ok, So my question is why are we multiplying the moment generating functions when we are looking for the combined loss? Shouldn't the solution involve the sum of the 3 expected values?

Also on page 145 it explains that you can find a moment generating function of a new variable by taking the weighted average of the moment generating functions of the variables you are combining.

I just don't quite understand the concept/difference here. thanks for any help.
The third moment of the combined loss is E[(X1+X2+X3)^3] so you will have all the cross product terms. If you only wanted the mean then you could sum.
If the pdf is a "mix" or weighted average then the MGF will be a weighted average but the weights have to sum to 1. You have a mix when there is more than one distribution generating losses and you are picking one at random. An example is a population comprised of a number of risk classes where you are picking someone from the population at random. With a sum you would be picking one from each class and summing their losses.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-28-2012, 04:39 PM
oceankyle oceankyle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Academic Actuary View Post
The third moment of the combined loss is E[(X1+X2+X3)^3] so you will have all the cross product terms. If you only wanted the mean then you could sum.
If the pdf is a "mix" or weighted average then the MGF will be a weighted average but the weights have to sum to 1. You have a mix when there is more than one distribution generating losses and you are picking one at random. An example is a population comprised of a number of risk classes where you are picking someone from the population at random. With a sum you would be picking one from each class and summing their losses.
Ah that clears it up some... Could you take the third derivative of each moment generating function add them, and then divide by 3?

Why did we take the product of the moment generating functions when looking for a sum?

Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-28-2012, 09:50 PM
Actuarialsuck Actuarialsuck is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,828
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceankyle View Post
Ah that clears it up some... Could you take the third derivative of each moment generating function add them, and then divide by 3?

Why did we take the product of the moment generating functions when looking for a sum?

Thanks again.
Because e^{x+y} = e^x e^y
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buru Buru View Post
i'm not. i do not troll.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.30763 seconds with 9 queries