corresponding to the r zero eigenvalues. Then:
Lemma 2. Under Assumption 3 and the conditions of Lemma 1,
■ ^ï
RrTD (1) Y1 ^F1(x)2dx
Fk(1)RrτD,Z
RrM(!) ft
RM z (Fk) n
V k 7
jointly in k = 1,...,m, where the Yk ’s andZ are independent q-variate standard normally
distributed, with Yk defined by (13). Moreover, Z does not depend on Fk .
Such weight functions Fk do exist. In particular,
Lemma 3. If Fk(x) = cos(2kπx), then the conditions (6) through (10) hold. Moreover, we then
have Fk(1) = 1, ʃʃFk(x)Fk(y)min(xy) dxdy = 1(kπ y2, ʃFk(x)2dx = 1.
There are many ways to choose these functions Fk, but as will be shown in section 5, the
above choice is optimal in some sense.
Denoting
Fk(x )2 dx
γ k = j
y ^^I^k(x )Fk((y )min(x, y ) dxdy
, δk
Fk (1)
↑∣ ʃFk (x )2 dx
(14)
it follows now easily from Lemmas 1-2:
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The name is absent
3. Studying How E-Markets Evaluation Can Enhance Trust in Virtual Business Communities
4. Imputing Dairy Producers' Quota Discount Rate Using the Individual Export Milk Program in Quebec
5. Integrating the Structural Auction Approach and Traditional Measures of Market Power
6. Two-Part Tax Controls for Forest Density and Rotation Time
7. The name is absent
8. Fertility in Developing Countries
9. Quelles politiques de développement durable au Mali et à Madagascar ?
10. The name is absent