On the long tail property of product convolution
Zhaolei Cui, Guancheng Jiang, Yuebao Wang

TL;DR
This paper investigates the conditions under which the product convolution of two independent non-negative random variables results in a long-tailed distribution, expanding understanding beyond exponential cases.
Contribution
It establishes new sufficient conditions for the product convolution to be long-tailed, including cases where one distribution is generalized long-tailed, not necessarily exponential.
Findings
Conditions for long-tailedness of product convolution are identified.
Many distributions satisfy these conditions, with some shown to be necessary.
Examples illustrate the applicability of the theoretical results.
Abstract
Let and be two independent random variables with corresponding distributions and supported on . The distribution of the product , which is called the product convolution of and , is denoted by . In this paper, some suitable conditions about and are given, under which the distribution belongs to the long-tailed distribution class. Here, is a generalized long-tailed distribution and is not necessarily an exponential distribution. Finally, a series of examples are given to show that the above conditions are satisfied by many distributions and one of them is necessary in some sense.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsProbability and Risk Models · Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications · Stochastic processes and financial applications
On the long tail property of product convolution
††thanks: Research supported by the National Science Foundation of China (No. 11071182).
Zhaolei Cui1) Guancheng Jiang2) Yuebao Wang3)
*1) School of mathematics and statistics, Changshu Institute of Technology, Suzhou, P. R. China, 215000
-
School of Economics Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, P. R. China, 200433
-
School of Mathematical Sciences, Soochow University, Suzhou, P. R. China, 215006
Corresponding author. Telephone: +86 512 67422726. Fax: +86 512 65112637. E-mail: [email protected] (Y. Wang)
**Abstract **
Let and be two independent random variables with corresponding distributions and supported on . The distribution of the product , which is called the product convolution of and , is denoted by . In this paper, some suitable conditions about and are given, under which the distribution belongs to the long-tailed distribution class. Here, is a generalized long-tailed distribution and is not necessarily an exponential distribution. Finally, a series of examples are given to show that the above conditions are satisfied by many distributions and one of them is necessary in some sense.
Keywords: product convolution; long tail property; generalized long-tailed distribution; exponential distributions
AMS 2010 Subject Classification: Primary 60E05, secondary 62E20, 60G50.
1 Introduction and main results
In this paper, without a special statement, let and be two independent random variables with corresponding distributions and supported on . Denote the distribution of the product by and it is called the product convolution of and , as opposed to the usual sum convolution defined to be the distribution of the sum .
As everyone knows, the concept of product convolution plays an important role in applied probability. For example, the present value of a random future claim, which is one of most fundamental quantities in finance and insurance, is expressed as the product of the random claim amount and the corresponding stochastic present value factor. Thus, the study of the tail behavior of product convolution has immediate implications in finance and insurance. There, the product convolution is often required to belong to the subexponential distribution class, see Embrechts and Goldie [10], Cline [7], Cline and Samorodnitsky [8], Tang and Tsitsiashvili [20, 21], Tang [18], Tang [19], Liu and Tang [15], Samorodnitsky and Sun [16], Xu et al. [27], etc. For this, as Cline and Samorodnitsky [8] points out: “The first one provides conditions for to be ‘long-tailed’, including the closure results for (see below for its definition).” The results in this regard can be found in Theorem 2.2 of Cline and Samorodnitsky [8], Theorem 1.1 of Tang [19], etc. This paper focuses on this issue. To this end, the concepts and notations of some related distribution classes are first introduced as follows.
For a distribution , denote its tail distribution by . Unless otherwise stated, all limiting relations are according to . With for two positive functions and , we write f(x)=o\big{(}g(x)\big{)} if , f(x)=O\big{(}g(x)\big{)} if , if , if and , and if .
A distribution supported on is said to belong to the exponential distribution class for some if
[TABLE]
When and the distribution is lattice, the variables and above should be restricted to values of the lattice span. When , it reduces to the class of long-tailed distributions and write . It is well known that every is heavy tailed in the sense of infinite exponential moments.
A distribution supported on is said to belong to the convolution equivalent distribution class for some if, and
[TABLE]
Furthermore, a distribution supported on is still said to be convolution equivalent if the distribution defined by
[TABLE]
is convolution equivalent, where denotes the indicator of an event , which is equal to if occurs and to [math] otherwise. In particular, the class is called as subexponential distribution class. When and is supported on , there is no requirement for to belong to the long-tailed distribution class.
The class was introduced by Chistyakov [4]. On its systematic discussion and application, see, for example, Embrechts et al. [11], Asmussen [1] and Foss et al. [13]. The classes and for some was introduced by Chover et al. [5, 6]. For some of the recent work involving these classes, see, for example, Watanabe [24], Watanabe and Yamamuro [25] and Cui et al. [9].
Another well-known class of heavy-tailed distributions is the class of dominated variation tail introduced by Feller [12]. Recall that a distribution supported on belongs to the class if
[TABLE]
The class are properly included in the following distribution class introduced by Klüppelberg [14]. A distribution supported on is said to belong to the generalized subexponential distribution class , if
[TABLE]
The class is properly included in the generalized long-tailed distribution class introduced by Simura and Watanabe [17] if
[TABLE]
Some new results involving the two classes can be found in Beke et al. [2], Xu et al. [29] and Xu et al. [30], Wang et al. [23], etc. Accordingly, we give the following indicator:
[TABLE]
Clearly, C^{*}(V,\cdot)\ \big{(}\text{or}\ C_{*}(V,\cdot)\big{)}:[0,\infty)\mapsto[1,\infty) is a non-decreasing function in , and
[TABLE]
Thus \lim_{t\to 0}C^{*}(V,t)\ \big{(}\text{or}\ C_{*}(V,t)\big{)} and \lim_{t\to\infty}C^{*}(V,t)\ \big{(}\text{or}\ C_{*}(V,t)\big{)} exist, which may be infinity and are denoted by C^{*}(V,0)\ \big{(}\text{or}\ C_{*}(V,0)\big{)} and C^{*}(V,\infty)\ \big{(}\text{or}\ C_{*}(V,\infty)\big{)}, respectively.
Using terminology in Bingham et al. [3], we know that if and only if the function belongs to the -regularly varying function class , where
[TABLE]
such that
[TABLE]
Now we return to the long tail property of product convolution. The pioneering work in this area is attributed to Theorem 2.2 of Cline and Samorodnitsky [8], and later a mature result is obtained by Theorem 1.1 of Tang [19]. Here, we introduce the latter in more detail. We denote by the set of all positive discontinuities of the distribution and recall the following condition:
Condition A , or and
[TABLE]
In general, it is not easy to verify the condition (1.1) since is usually unknown. For this reason, Corollary 1.1 of Tang [19] gives the following three useful sufficient conditions in terms of the known distributions and for (1.1):
there is some such that is eventually non-increasing in ;
;
it holds for all that , which is further implied by either \overline{G}(vx)=o\big{(}\overline{G}(x)\big{)} for some or \overline{G}(vx)=o\big{(}\overline{F}(x)\big{)} for some .
Among them, Condition (B) can be slightly weakened to for some integer by Theorem 2.1 (1a) of Xu et al. [28], see Xu et al. [27] for details.
Theorem 1.A**.**
Assume that for some , then if and only if the Condition A holds.
Based on Theorem 2.1 of Cline and Samorodnitsky [8] and Theorem 1.A, Xu et al. [27] obtains an equivalent condition of under the prerequisite that . The prerequisite of Theorem 1.A is that for some . In practice, there are many distributions, which are not exponential, while their product convolution is still long-tailed, see Example 3.2 and Example 3.3 below. In this way, the following interesting question arises naturally.
Problem 1.1 If the distribution of and is not necessarily exponential, under what conditions can the product convolution be long-tailed?
For this problem, there are some results for some special distributions and , see Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2 of Xu et al. [27], among which some conditions still involve the unknown distribution . This paper hopes to get a general conclusion for the generalized long-tailed distribution , in which all conditions only involve the known distributions and . Here we emphasize that the class of generalized long-tailed distributions has a very wide range.
Theorem 1.1**.**
For some , assume that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
If , then . Further, if . Conversely, if , then .
Remark 1.1**.**
Here, if , then is heavy-tailed; otherwise, is light-tailed. can be light-tailed or heavy-tailed. The tail of can be lighter or heavier than the tail of . And and do not have to be exponential distributions, see Remark 1.4 below for details.
Remark 1.2**.**
When , the condition (1.2) for is automatically satisfied. In fact, by Theorem 2.2.7 of Bingham et al. [3], if and only if
[TABLE]
where and are bounded on for some , and measurable. It is easy to find the condition (1.2) holds for each pair of .
Remark 1.3**.**
The condition is necessary in some sense, see Example 3.1 below. In particular, when for some , the condition is also automatically satisfied.
Remark 1.4**.**
i) When , there are many light-tailed distributions belonging to or \mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\bigcup_{\beta\geq 0}\mathcal{L}(\beta)\bigcup\mathcal{OS}\big{)} such that , and satisfying the condition (1.2) by Remark 1.2. See Example 3.2 and Example 3.3 below.
ii) When , there are many heavy-tailed distributions belonging to \mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\mathcal{L}\bigcup\mathcal{OS}\big{)} satisfying the condition , see Example 3.3 below. In addition, the condition (1.2) holds for these distributions.
Subsequently, if the condition (1.3) also holds for the distribution , then by Theorem 1.1, we have .
Remark 1.5**.**
Although the condition (1.2) holds, the distribution may not belong to the class . For example, if and , then the conditions (1.2) and (1.3) with and hold, while \overline{H}(x)=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x-t)\big{)} for each . Therefore and . In fact, it follows from Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.2 below that, for any ,
[TABLE]
where and are two positive functions satisfying , and b_{1}(x)=o\big{(}x/b_{2}(x)\big{)}.
Next, we characterize the properties of product convolution from different angles.
Proposition 1.1**.**
i) If for some , then
[TABLE]
which is equivalent to that \overline{V}(x)=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x)\big{)} for each distribution satisfying for all . At this time, \overline{V}(cx)=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x)\big{)} for each . Further, if and for all , then .
ii) For each , if \lim x^{\delta}\max\big{\{}\overline{G}(x),\overline{F}(x)\big{\}}=0, then
[TABLE]
and .
In Section 2, we prove Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 1.1. In order to illustrate the significance and value of Theorem 1.1, we give some examples of distributions satisfying the two conditions (1.2) and (1.3) and show that the condition is necessary in some sense for in Section 3.
2 Proofs of Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 1.1
Proof of Theorem 1.1 We prove the theorem through the following two lemmas.
Lemma 2.1**.**
For some , assume that
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Thus, for each distribution satisfying for some , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any two constants and , by (2.1), there is a positive number large enough such that, for all , it holds uniformly for all that
[TABLE]
where and . Thus
[TABLE]
that is (2.2) holds for the constant .
For each , we define a distribution such that for all . We take , then
[TABLE]
Therefore, by (2.2), we have
[TABLE]
that is (2.3) holds for the constant .
Lemma 2.2**.**
Assume that
[TABLE]
Then there are two functions such that , , b_{1}(x)=o\big{(}x/b_{2}(x)\big{)} and
[TABLE]
In addition, assume that , then it holds uniformly for all that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since \overline{F}(cx)=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x)\big{)} for each , for each integer , there exists a sequence of positive numbers such that and when ,
[TABLE]
Let be a function such that
[TABLE]
Clearly, and \overline{F}(x/b_{0}(x))=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x)\big{)}. Define a continuous linear function by
[TABLE]
Then for all , . When ,
[TABLE]
And
[TABLE]
Similarly, there exists a function such that , , and
[TABLE]
By (2.7), we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, (2.5) holds.
For the above function , by and (2.8), it holds uniformly for all that
[TABLE]
Therefore, combined with (2.5), (2.6) holds uniformly for all .
Now, we prove the theorem. Firstly, according to Lemma 2.1, by (1.2) and (1.3), we have (2.4) holds. Then according to Lemma 2.2, by , for each and , there is a function such that , , b_{1}(x)=o\big{(}x/b_{2}(x)\big{)} and for any and large enough ,
[TABLE]
Therefore, it is obvious that , for the constant . Further, if , we have .
Conversely, according to the uniform convergence theorem for the function class , see, for example, Theorem 2.0.8 of Bingham et al. [3], by , for any and large enough , we have
[TABLE]
Combining with and , we know that .
Proof of proposition 1.1 i) If for some , then
[TABLE]
Therefore, by Theorem (2) of Wang et al. [22], we know that (1.4) is equivalent to the next conclusion.
For any , We define a distribution as in the proof of Lemma 2.1, then for any ,
[TABLE]
Thus, by above conclusion, \overline{G}(cx)=\overline{G_{c}}(x)=o\big{(}\overline{H}(x)\big{)}. Further, if , then .
ii) For each , since , and . Thus,
[TABLE]
for the constant . Therefore, (1.5) holds by the arbitrariness of , and .
3 Some examples
In this section, we first show that the necessity of the condition in some sense. Next, we provide some examples of distribution in the class or \mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\bigcup_{\gamma\geq 0}\mathcal{L}(\gamma)\bigcup\mathcal{OS}\big{)} with normal shapes satisfying the conditions (1.2) and . It is easy to see that there are many such distributions.
Example 3.1**.**
Assume that for some is a continuous distribution. For example, we can take
[TABLE]
In fact, this distribution belongs to the class . We construct a distribution generated by as following:
[TABLE]
for all , where is a sequence of positive numbers such that
[TABLE]
for some and all .
First, it is easy to find that, , , and the condition (1.2) holds for any in the case that . When , the condition (1.2) also may be established. For example, the distribution generated by the above specific distribution in (3.9), satisfies the condition (1.2) for any with .
Next, we note that, when , there is a constant such that for all . Otherwise, for large enough and any constant ,
[TABLE]
Here there is a contradiction. However, when , if there is a constant such that for large enough, then
[TABLE]
which is inconsistent with the fact that , thus as .
Third, we prove and . For the former, we only need to calculate for small enough such that, for all , and are located in adjacent intervals for any , and (or ) and (or ) are located in the same interval. When and ,
[TABLE]
when and , for large enough,
[TABLE]
By the above fact, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by for each , we know that . Further, we assume satisfies the condition (1.3), then by Theorem 1.1.
Finally, we show that the condition of Theorem 1.1 is necessary in some sense. In fact, there is a distribution , which satisfies the above requirements, but its product convolution with does not belong to the class .
We take a specific distribution in (3.10) with some and , which is generated by distribution in (3.9), such that
[TABLE]
for all . Clearly,
[TABLE]
and . Thus and the conditions (1.2) and (1.3) hold with for each pair of .
Take , then by (2.6) of Lemma 2.2, there exist two functions satisfying , , and b_{1}(x)=o\big{(}x/b_{2}(x)\big{)}, such that (2.5) holds. Moreover, we denote and might as well assume that it is odd, where the symbol stands for the largest integer not exceeding a real number . Let be a r.v. with the distribution . Then for each , by (2.5), it still holds that
[TABLE]
Take a sequence, so we can know the number also is odd, subsequently, it holds uniformly for all that
[TABLE]
Similarly, it holds uniformly for all that
[TABLE]
By (3.11), (3.12) and (3.13), we have
[TABLE]
which implies .
Example 3.2**.**
Here, we give a class of distributions, in which each distribution belongs to the class , and satisfy the conditions (1.2) and with each pair of such that for some .
Let be an absolutely continuous distribution on belonging to the class for some with a density . For example,
[TABLE]
By Karamata’s theorem, we have . So we might as well assume that
[TABLE]
We take a constant . Let be a function such that
[TABLE]
Because and for ,
[TABLE]
the function is a distribution function supported on .
Clearly, , while . Thus, for each , there exists a sequence of positive numbers such that as and
[TABLE]
Since for , there exists a subsequence of the sequence and a constant such that and as . Thus,
[TABLE]
In addition, it is also obvious that, for each pair of , (1.2) holds.
Example 3.3**.**
There is a light-tailed distribution and a heavy-tailed distribution, both of which belong to the class \mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\bigcup_{\beta\geq 0}\mathcal{L}(\beta)\bigcup\mathcal{OS}\big{)} and satisfy the condition (1.2) for some and the condition .
Let \theta\in\big{(}3/2,(\sqrt{5}+1)/2\big{)} and be constants. Assume is so large that . We define a distribution supported on such that
[TABLE]
where is a regularization constant and for all nonnegative integers. Here, is heavy-tailed and belongs to the class , which comes from Proposition 5.1 of Xu et al. [31].
In addition, we have for each , thus . In fact, for any , if is in the same interval, then by , we have
[TABLE]
For any , if , then
[TABLE]
if , then
[TABLE]
By the above fact, we have
[TABLE]
* For some , let be a distribution defined by*
[TABLE]
Then F\in\mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\bigcup_{\beta\geq 0}\mathcal{L}(\beta)\bigcup\mathcal{OS}) and
[TABLE]
thus . Clearly, (1.2) holds for each pair of and is light-tailed.
* For some , let be a distribution defined by*
[TABLE]
Then is a heavy-tailed distribution belonging to the class \mathcal{OL}\setminus\big{(}\mathcal{L}\bigcup\mathcal{OS}) and
[TABLE]
thus . Clearly, (1.2) holds for each pair of with .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S. Asmussen, Ruin Probabilities. World Scientific Publishing Company, (2000).
- 2[2] S. Beck, J. Blath and M. Scheutzow, A new class of large claims size distributions: definition, properties, and ruin theory. Bernoulli, 21 (2015), 2457-2483.
- 3[3] N.H. Bingham, C.M. Goldie and J.L. Teugels. Regular Variation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.
- 4[4] V.P. Chistyakov. A theorem on sums of independent, positive random variables and its application to branching processes. Theory Probab. Appl., 9 (1964), 640-648.
- 5[5] Chover J., Ney P. and Wainger S. Functions of probability measures. J. Anal. Math. 26 (1973 a), 255-302.
- 6[6] Chover J., Ney P. and Wainger S. Degeneracy properties of subcritical branching processes. Ann. Probab. 1 (1973 b), 663-673.
- 7[7] D.B.H. Cline, Convolution tails, product tails and domains of attraction. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 72(4) (1986), 529-557.
- 8[8] D. Cline and G. Samorodnitsky. Subexponential of the product of independent random variables. Stoch. Process. Appl., 49 (1994), 75-98.
