Solving Problems Submitted to MAA Journals (Part 2a)

The following problem appeared in Volume 53, Issue 4 (2022) of The College Mathematics Journal. This was the first problem that was I able to solve in over 30 years of subscribing to MAA journals.

Suppose that X and Y are independent, uniform random variables over [0,1]. Now define the random variable Z by

Z = (Y-X) {\bf 1}(Y \ge X) + (1-X+Y) {\bf 1}(Y<X).

Prove that Z is uniform over [0,1]. Here, {\bf 1}[S] is the indicator function that is equal to 1 if S is true and 0 otherwise.

The first thing that went through my mind was something like, “This looks odd. But it’s a probability problem using concepts from a senior-level but undergraduate probability course. This was once my field of specialization. I had better be able to get this.”

My second thought was that one way of proving that Z is uniform on [0,1] is showing that P(Z \le t) = t if 0 \le t \le 1.

My third thought was that Z really had a two-part definition:

Z = \bigg\{ \begin{array}{ll} Y-X, & Y \ge X \\ 1-X+Y, & Y <X \end{array}

So I got started by dividing this probability into the two cases:

P(Z \le t) = P(Z \le t, Y \ge X ~\hbox{or}~ Y < X)

= P(Z \le t, Y \ge X ~\hbox{or}~ Z \le t, Y < X)

= P(Z \le t, Y \ge X) + P(Z \le t, Y < X)

= P(Y-X \le t, Y \ge X) + P(1 - X + Y \le t, Y < X)

= P(Y \le X + t, Y \ge X) + P( Y \le X + t - 1, Y < X)

= P(X \le Y \le X + t) + P(Y \le X + t - 1).

In the last step, since 0 \le t \le 1, the events Y \le X + t - 1 and Y < X are redundant: if Y \le X + t - 1, then Y will automatically be less than X. Therefore, it’s safe to remove Y < X from the last probability.

Ordinarily, such probabilities are computed by double integrals over the joint probability density function of X and Y, which usually isn’t easy. However, in this case, since X and Y are independent and uniform over [0,1], the ordered pair (X,Y) is uniform on the unit square [0,1] \times [0,1]. Therefore, probabilities can be found by simply computing areas.

In this case, since the area of the unit square is 1, P(Z \le t) is equal to the sum of the areas of

\{(x,y) \in [0,1] \times [0,1] : x \le y \le x + t \},

which is depicted in green below, and

\{(x,y) \in [0,1] \times [0,1] : y \le x + t - 1 \},

which is depicted in purple.

First, the area in green is a trapezoid. The y-intercept of the line y = x+t is (0,t), and the two lengths of t and 1-t on the upper left of the square are found from this y-intercept. The area of the green trapezoid is easiest found by subtracting the areas of two isosceles right triangles:

$latex \displaystyle \frac{(1)^2}{2} – \frac{(1-t)^2}{2} = \frac{1-1+2t-t^2}{2} = \frac{2t-t^2}{2}.

Second, the area in purple is an isosceles right triangle. The y-intercept of the line y=x+t-1 is (0,t-1), so that the distance from the y-intercept to the origin is 1-t. From this, the two lengths of 1-t and t are found. Therefore, the area of the purple right triangle is \displaystyle \frac{t^2}{2}.

Adding, we conclude that

P(Z \le t) = \displaystyle \frac{2t-t^2}{2} + \frac{t^2}{2} = \frac{2t}{2} = t.

Therefore, Z is uniform over [0,1].

A closing note: after going 0-for-4000 in my previous 30+ years of attempting problems submitted to MAA journals, I was unbelievably excited to finally get one. As I recall, it took me less than an hour to get the above solution, although writing up the solution cleanly took longer.

However, the above was only Part 1 of a two-part problem, so I knew I just had to get the second part before submitting. That’ll be the subject of the next post.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.