Expected deviation of a sum

Bounds on the expected deviation of a sum from a threshold.

Here are bounds on the expected deviation of a sum of 0/1-random variables above or below some threshold (typically near its mean).

For example, suppose Alice flips a fair coin times. She pays Bob $1 for each head after the first heads (if any). What is her expected payment to Bob? The bounds here say: at most . For example, if , the expected payment is . If , the expected payment is . In general the expectation is about times the probability (according to Chernoff) that the sum exceeds its mean by a factor of .



Sums with a fixed number of terms

First, bounds that are directly analogous to standard Chernoff bounds:

Lemma 1 (expected deviation from threshold).

Let be a sum of independent random variables, where each is in and is fixed. Let with .

(a) If for all then

(b) If for all then

Proof of Lemma 1

Proof.

(a) Using1 , then following the proof of the Chernoff bound, the expectation in question is at most

(b) Using2 , then following the proof of the Chernoff bound, the expectation in question is at most

 
 

Sums with randomly many terms

Assume a system goes through a random sequence of states , where each state determines two values: and , each in , where the expectation of each is at most that of :

Let and .

Lemma 2 (expected deviation from threshold).

For any stopping time with finite expectation, and any with , if is uniformly bounded from above (for all , by some finite bound independent of the outcome of the experiment), then the expectation of is at most .

Proof of Lemma 2

Proof.

The proof is similar to that of Lemma 1, but following the proof of stopping-time Chernoff, instead of the proof of Chernoff.

Using3 for , the expectation in question is at most where

To finish, note that is a super-martingale, and is uniformly bounded from below (by 0) and from above (as and is uniformly bounded from above). Hence, by Walds, the expectation of is at most .

 
 

Footnotes

  1. .
  2. WLOG . That and and imply .
  3. Using and , reduce to case (trivial) or (follows from previous).