Conditional expectation as an information-dependent prediction
Define an average relative to available information, preserve its integral identities, and distinguish almost-sure equality from pointwise equality.
On this page
The question for today
What you’ll understand
- Construct conditional expectations on a finite partition.
- Explain measurability, integral preservation, and almost-sure uniqueness.
- Apply the tower property without reversing the information inclusion.
A prediction can change when a sensor reveals a category even though the underlying outcome has not changed. Conditional expectation formalizes the best average prediction supported by specified information. The output is usually a random variable, not a single number: different observed categories produce different predictions. This is the organizing operation behind filtering, martingales, and sequential inference. Begin with finite groups of outcomes, then keep the same defining properties when conditioning on continuous measurements for which individual observed values may have probability zero.
Average within the distinctions an observer can make
Suppose the sample space is partitioned into observable groups. An observer knows which group occurred but cannot distinguish outcomes inside it. On each group of positive probability, average X using probabilities conditional on that group. The resulting predictor is constant within the group because it cannot exploit distinctions the observer lacks. Unequal outcome probabilities require weighted averages. Conditioning does not mean deleting uncertainty by replacing the unknown outcome with the most likely member of its group.
A sigma algebra encodes this information more generally: it lists the events whose occurrence the observer can determine. A random variable measurable with respect to that sigma algebra can be calculated from the information. If X itself is observable, its conditional expectation is X almost surely. If X is independent of the information and integrable, its conditional expectation is its ordinary mean almost surely. These two limiting cases provide useful checks on a proposed formula before any calculation begins.
Integral preservation replaces division by a zero-probability event
For an integrable X, a conditional expectation Y given G must be G-measurable and reproduce X's integral on every event in G. Existence follows from the Radon–Nikodym theorem; the definition does not ask for division by the probability of an individual continuous observation. It characterizes an equivalence class of predictors. Two versions can disagree on an event of probability zero while representing the same conditional expectation, so a claim of uniqueness must include the words almost surely.
This qualification matters when someone asks for a conditional value at an exceptional observation. The general definition alone may leave that value unspecified. A chosen regular conditional distribution, a continuous version, or other structure can supply a meaningful convention, but that convention is additional information. An almost-sure identity is sufficient for expectations and probability statements. It is not permission to assign a unique numerical prediction at every theoretically possible input without checking the version being used.
Coarser information and squared prediction error
If H contains less information than G, first averaging given G and then averaging given H gives the same result as averaging X directly given H. This tower property uses nested sigma algebras. It does not say that conditioning in arbitrary orders commutes. Also, a bounded G-measurable factor can be pulled through the conditional expectation because it is already known to the observer. Products of two unknown random variables cannot generally be split into products of their conditional means.
When X has finite second moment, conditional expectation is the orthogonal projection onto the G-measurable square-integrable random variables. Its residual has zero inner product with every such predictor, so the Pythagorean identity proves minimum mean-square error. This geometric interpretation requires L2, whereas the defining integral characterization only requires L1. The distinction is useful in heavy-tailed models: an average prediction may exist even when a squared-error objective is infinite and the projection argument cannot be used. Conditioning also preserves nonnegativity: if X is nonnegative almost surely, a valid conditional predictor cannot be negative on a positive-probability observable event.
Work it through
A two-category sensor
Four equally likely outcomes have X values 0, 2, 4, and 10. A sensor reports low for the first two and high for the last two. Find the conditional predictor and its mean-square error.
Each sensor category has probability 1/2. Average within low to get (0+2)/2=1, and within high to get (4+10)/2=7. The predictor takes values 1 and 7 according to the observed category.
Check the defining identity on low: E[X·1(low)]=(0+2)/4=1/2, while E[Y·1(low)]=1×1/2=1/2. On high, both sides equal 14/4=7/2. The unconditional mean is therefore (1+7)/2=4.
The four residuals X−Y are −1, 1, −3, and 3. Their squared average is (1+1+9+9)/4=5. Predicting the unconditional mean 4 instead gives (16+4+0+36)/4=14, so the sensor removes 9 units of mean-square error.
The information-dependent predictor is 1 or 7, with mean 4 and squared prediction error 5. It preserves averages while exploiting precisely the observed category.
The living notebook
Explore the model
Interactive lab · probability
An average depends on the declared information
Set success probability p to 1/2 and trials n to 4, then inspect the exact binomial bars and mean 2. Change p and predict the new mean before reading it. These bars represent a fully specified unconditional count distribution; they do not implement the four-outcome sensor or perform conditional expectation. Use the contrast to ask which information a prediction actually uses.
- Mean · np
- 5
- Variance · np(1−p)
- 2.5
- Total probability
- 1
These are exact binomial probabilities for independent trials with one fixed success probability. Playback tours the distribution; it does not resample outcomes. Parameter changes pause playback and recompute the model at the current elapsed time. Reset restores both parameters and returns time to zero. Playback starts paused. Adjust either parameter, then choose Play or Step.
Look forA distributional average becomes a conditional predictor only after the observed information is specified.
Pause & reason
Check your understanding
Your turn
Try it yourself
For the same four equally likely outcomes, let a coarser sensor reveal nothing. Average the two-category predictor again using this coarser information.
Take a moment to make a prediction or work it out on paper. Open a hint when you need one.
Give me a hint
A predictor based on no distinctions must be constant, and it must retain the overall mean.
Compare with the solution
Both categories have probability 1/2, so averaging their predictions gives (1+7)/2=4. This equals E[X]=(0+2+4+10)/4. The tower property works because the trivial sigma algebra is contained in the category sigma algebra; it does not depend on the sensor being perfectly informative.
Keep the idea
Take it with you
- Conditional expectation is an integrable random variable measurable with respect to stated information.
- Its defining property preserves integrals on every observable event, and its uniqueness is almost sure.
- Nested information gives the tower property; finite second moments add an orthogonal-projection interpretation.
Read further
Original sources and deeper explanations to follow at your own pace.
Optional progress, saved in this browser when available. Revisit any lesson at any time.
Lesson not marked complete.