SPB Git

spb/wp29_uqo

Public

# Report — F5-conf-03: sums of normal random variables

# Question

Is X + Y necessarily normal when (A) X and Y are each normal, or (B) X and Y are independent and each normal? For each false proposition, give a concrete, verifiable counterexample.

# Data and exclusions

  • data/propositions.csv: 2 rows (A, B). data/design.csv: 2 rows (seed = 20261029, n = 100000).
  • No data issues were found and nothing was excluded.

# Method

  • The verdicts come from mathematical argument (see out/argument.md). The simulation only illustrates them.
  • A (false). Construction: X ~ N(0,1), S an independent random sign (±1), Y = S·X. Both marginals are N(0,1). X + Y equals 0 with probability 1/2 and 2X otherwise. This large atom at 0 makes the departure from normality obvious at any reasonable sample size.
  • B (true). Proof via characteristic functions: multiply them, then apply the uniqueness theorem.
  • Simulation (out/analysis.py): numpy.random.default_rng(20261029). It draws n = 100000 values of X, then n signs (in that order), and writes out/counterexample.csv (columns x, y).
    • Reported statistics: sample means and SDs (ddof = 1) of x, y and x + y.
    • KS distance of x + y against N(sample mean, sample SD).
    • Auxiliary checks: KS distance of x and of y against N(0,1), the fraction of exact zeros in x + y, and corr(x, y).

# Results

  • Verdicts: A is false (statement_true = false; counterexample provided). B is true (statement_b_true = true).
  • Simulated counterexample (n = 100000, seed 20261029):
quantity value theoretical
mean_x / sd_x −0.0033 / 0.9982 0 / 1
mean_y / sd_y −0.0002 / 0.9982 0 / 1
mean_sum / sd_sum −0.0036 / 1.4059 0 / √2 ≈ 1.4142
KS(x+y vs fitted normal) 0.2508 > 0 (the law has an atom of 1/2)
KS(x vs N(0,1)), KS(y vs N(0,1)) 0.0028, 0.0016 0
fraction of x+y exactly 0 0.5005 0.5
corr(x, y) −0.0082 0
  • The marginals fit N(0,1) closely: both KS distances are below the approximate 5% critical value 1.36/√n ≈ 0.0043.
  • The sum's KS distance of 0.25 is about 58 times that critical value, and half of the sum values are exactly 0. A normal law cannot produce this.

# Uncertainty

  • The verdicts are mathematical facts and carry no statistical uncertainty.
  • Sample statistics have Monte Carlo error of about 1/√n ≈ 0.003 for means. Their deviations from the theoretical values are consistent with that.
  • The KS critical value above is the textbook value for a fully specified null. Because the sum's normal was fitted from the sample, that test (Lilliefors setting) is conservative. This does not matter here: the observed distance exceeds it by more than an order of magnitude.

# Limitations and open issues

  • What the simulation establishes. For this specific construction, a finite sample has marginals that look normal and a sum that is plainly non-normal, with an atom at 0 of about 1/2. This matches the theory and checks that the construction is implemented correctly.
  • What it does not establish. A finite sample cannot prove that the marginals are exactly normal, and it cannot prove proposition B. Both rest on the proofs in out/argument.md.
  • The counterexample is one of many. Any (X, Y) with normal marginals that is not jointly normal can give a non-normal sum, though not every such pair does.
Files · main
Menu

Theme