FS1 2.2, 2.3 - Means, variances and the Poisson approximation

FS1 2.2, 2.3 - Means, variances and the Poisson approximation

A binomial and a Poisson model can have the same mean while predicting different spreads and probabilities. You will use their mean and variance formulae (FS1 2.2), recover binomial parameters and justify when a Poisson distribution is a useful approximation (FS1 2.3).

Matching the mean does not match the spread

Two experiments both expect three successes: X∼B(300,0.01)X\sim\mathrm B(300,0.01) and W∼B(6,0.5)W\sim\mathrm B(6,0.5). Should the same Po⁡(3)\operatorname{Po}(3) model approximate both? No: one has rare successes across many trials, while the other has only six trials and success probability one half.

Their exact zero-success probabilities are approximately 0.04900.0490 and 0.01560.0156, more than threefold apart despite the equal means. By the end you will see why the Poisson approximation belongs to the first experiment.

You already know

From A-level Mathematics, X∼B(n,p)X\sim\mathrm B(n,p) counts successes in nn independent trials, each with the same success probability pp, and has values 0,1,…,n0,1,\ldots,n. From discrete expectation, a mean describes centre and a variance describes squared spread; matching one does not establish a model's suitability.

The mean and variance of these two distributions are supplied results. You do not need to derive them from their probability formulae.

Binomial and Poisson moments

If X∼B(n,p)X\sim\mathrm B(n,p), where nn is a positive integer and 0≤p≤10\le p\le1, then

E(X)=np,Var⁡(X)=np(1−p)\mathrm E(X)=np,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(X)=np(1-p)

If Y∼Po⁡(λ)Y\sim\operatorname{Po}(\lambda), where λ>0\lambda>0, then

E(Y)=λ,Var⁡(Y)=λ\mathrm E(Y)=\lambda,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(Y)=\lambda

These are variances, not standard deviations.

In the formula booklet.

For the opening experiments,

ModelB(300,0.01)B(6,0.5)Po⁡(3)Mean333Variance2.971.53\begin{array}{c|ccc} \text{Model}&\mathrm B(300,0.01)&\mathrm B(6,0.5)&\operatorname{Po}(3)\\\hline \text{Mean}&3&3&3\\ \text{Variance}&2.97&1.5&3 \end{array}

The first binomial's variance is close to the Poisson variance; the second's is only half as large. In general, a binomial variance is at most its mean because 0≤1−p≤10\le1-p\le1. A Poisson variance equals its mean exactly under the model.

Observed sample means and variances will fluctuate, so a small difference in a dataset does not by itself disprove a Poisson model. A substantial difference, together with a contextual reason such as event clustering, can indicate that the model is unsuitable. The exact equalities above concern the model's population moments.

Key idea

For a binomial model, Var⁡(X)=E(X)(1−p)\operatorname{Var}(X)=\mathrm E(X)(1-p). As pp becomes small with the mean held fixed, its variance approaches the equal-mean Poisson variance.

The word “population” makes the following an exact parameter question, rather than a judgement about sampling variation.

Recovering the number of trials and success probability

When a binomial mean and variance are both known, divide the variance by the mean to remove the unknown number of trials.

For a positive mean μ=np\mu=np, the ratio is np(1−p)/(np)=1−pnp(1-p)/(np)=1-p. Once pp is known, the mean gives nn. Keep the parameter conditions in view: a computed probability must lie between zero and one, and the number of trials must be an integer.

Binomial parameters from moments

If a binomial variable has mean μ>0\mu>0, variance vv and p>0p>0, then

p=1−vμ,n=μpp=1-\frac v\mu,\qquad n=\frac\mu p

The resulting nn must be a positive integer and 0<p≤10<p\le1. If the proposed moments violate these conditions, they do not define such a binomial distribution.

Not in the formula booklet: learn it.

These rearrangements come from the supplied mean and variance formulae. A positive mean with variance zero gives the boundary case p=1p=1, provided the mean itself is a possible integer trial count.

Worked example 1: a variance noticeably below the mean

Question. A binomial variable has mean 66 and variance 4.84.8. Find nn and pp.

Plan. Use the ratio of variance to mean to find pp, then substitute into np=6np=6.

np=6,np(1−p)=4.8state the two moment equations1−p=4.86=0.8divide the equationsp=0.2solve for the probabilityn=60.2=30use the mean\begin{aligned} np&=6,\qquad np(1-p)=4.8 &&\text{state the two moment equations}\\ 1-p&=\frac{4.8}{6}=0.8 &&\text{divide the equations}\\ p&=0.2 &&\text{solve for the probability}\\ n&=\frac6{0.2}=30 &&\text{use the mean} \end{aligned}

Why this step? Division removes nn entirely. Solving for nn first would leave a less convenient expression involving pp in both equations.

Answer. n=30n=30, p=0.2p=0.2.

Check. 30(0.2)=630(0.2)=6 and 30(0.2)(0.8)=4.830(0.2)(0.8)=4.8. The trial count is a positive integer and the probability is valid.

Worked example 2 changes only the variance, from 4.84.8 to 5.945.94, keeping the mean at 66. A variance closer to the mean will force a smaller success probability and more trials.

Worked example 2: many trials with rare successes

Question. A binomial variable has mean 66 and variance 5.945.94. Find nn and pp.

Plan. Repeat the ratio calculation, retaining the exact decimal values before division.

1−p=5.946=0.99variance divided by meanp=0.01small success probabilityn=60.01=600preserve the given mean\begin{aligned} 1-p&=\frac{5.94}{6}=0.99 &&\text{variance divided by mean}\\ p&=0.01 &&\text{small success probability}\\ n&=\frac6{0.01}=600 &&\text{preserve the given mean} \end{aligned}

Why this step? The mean remains 66, so reducing pp requires a compensating increase in nn. A mean alone could not distinguish the two experiments.

Answer. n=600n=600, p=0.01p=0.01.

Check. 600(0.01)=6600(0.01)=6 and 600(0.01)(0.99)=5.94600(0.01)(0.99)=5.94. Both supplied moments are recovered.

There is no reason to round an exact trial count arising from exact moment data. If it is not an integer, the proposed exact moments are inconsistent with a binomial model.

Watch out

Wrong: p=v/μp=v/\mu. That ratio is 1−p1-p. Right: subtract the ratio from 11, then check both the original mean and variance.

Use a new pair of moments to distinguish the success probability from its complement.

Continue this lesson.

You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.

Create free account