Joint Mixability of Elliptical Distributions and

arXiv:1706.05499v2 [math.ST] 18 Oct 2017

Related Families

Chuancun Yin

∗

School of Statistics, Qufu Normal University
Shandong 273165, China

e-mail: ccyin@mail.qfnu.edu.cn
Dan Zhu
School of Statistics, Qufu Normal University
Shandong 273165, China

October 19, 2017

Abstract

In this paper, we further develop the theory of complete mixability and

joint mixability for some distribution families. We generalize a result of Rüschendorf
and Uckelmann (2002) related to complete mixability of continuous distribution function
having a symmetric and unimodal density. Two different proofs to a result of Wang and
Wang (2016) which related to the joint mixability of elliptical distributions with the same
characteristic generator are present. We solve the Open Problem 7 in Wang (2015) by
constructing a bimodal-symmetric distribution. The joint mixability of slash-elliptical
distributions and skew-elliptical distributions is studied and the extension to multivariate
distributions is also investigated.
Keywords: Complete mixability, joint mixability, multivariate dependence, slash/skewelliptical distributions, elliptical distributions
AMS subject classifications: 60E05 60E10 60E15
∗

Corresponding author.

1

1

Introduction

In recent years, the problem of studying complete mixability and joint mixability of
distributions has received considerable attention. Complete mixability and joint mixability describe whether it is possible to generate random variables (or vectors) from given
distributions with constant sum. The formally definition of complete mixability for a
distribution was first introduced in Wang and Wang (2011) and then extended to an arbitrary set of distributions in Wang, Peng and Yang (2013), although the concept has been
used in variance reduction problems earlier (see Gaffke and Rüschendorf (1981), Knott
and Smith (2006), Rüschendorf and Uckelmann (2002)). The properties are particularly
of interest in quantitative risk management and optimization problems in the theory of
optimal couplings, where dependence between risks is usually unknown or partially und

known. Throughout the paper, we write X = Y if the random variables (or vectors) X
and Y have the same distribution. For a cumulative distributions function F , we write
X ∼ F to denote F (x) = P (X ≤ x). By convention, all vectors will be written in bold

and will be considered as column vectors, with the superscript ⊤ for transposition. Next

we introduce the concepts of completely mixable and jointly mixable distributions.

Definition 1.2 (Wang, Peng and Yang (2013)). Suppose n is a positive integer
The univariate distribution functions F1 , · · · , Fn are jointly mixable (JM) if there exist

n random variables X1 , · · · , Xn with distribution functions F1 , · · · , Fn , respectively, such
that

P (X1 + · · · + Xn = C) = 1,

(1.1)

for some C ∈ R. If (1.1) holds with Fj = F, 1 ≤ j ≤ n, the distribution F is said to be
n-completely mixable (n-CM). Any such C is called a joint center of (F1 , · · · , Fn ).

For a brief history of the concept of the complete mixability, we refer to the recent
papers of Wang (2015) and Wang and Wang (2016). Existing results on complete mixability and joint mixability are summarized in Wang and Wang (2011), Puccetti, Wang
and Wang (2012) and Wang and Wang (2016). As pointed out in Puccetti and Wang
(2015b), as a full characterization of completely mixable distribution is still out of reach,
there are even less results concerning sufficient conditions for joint mixable distributions.
The only available ones are given in the recent paper of Wang and Wang (2016).
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we discuss the condi-

2

tions on a result of Rüschendorf and Uckelmann (2002) related to complete mixability
of continuous distribution function having a symmetric and unimodal density. Section 3
is dedicated to joint mixability of elliptical distributions and slash/skew-elliptical distributions, respectively. Section 4 extended the result to the class of multivariate elliptical
distributions.

2

Symmetric Distributions

It would be of interest to characterize the class of completely mixable distributions. Only
partial characterizations are known in the literature. One nice result for the complete
mixability is given by Rüschendorf and Uckelmann (2002), which is equivalent to state
that any continuous distribution function having a symmetric and unimodal density is nCM for any n ≥ 2. Wang (2014) provided a new proof using duality representation. The

property was also extended to multivariate distributions by Rüschendorf and Uckelmann

(2002). Wang and Wang (2016) based on a different technical approach to study the joint
mixability of unimodal-symmetric densities.
Lemma 2.1. (Rüschendorf and Uckelmann (2002)). Any continuous distribution function having a symmetric and unimodal density is n-CM for any n ≥ 2.
Lemma 2.2. (Wang and Wang (2016)). Suppose that F1 , · · · , Fn are distributions with

unimodal-symmetric densities from the same location-scale family with scale parameters
θ1 , · · · , θn , respectively. Then F1 , · · · , Fn is JM if and only if the scale inequality
n
X
i=1

is satisfied.

θi ≥ 2 max θi

(2.1)

1≤i≤n

Proof Using Theorem 3.1 in Wang and Wang (2016), we can give a more simple proof
d

to “if part” of Lemma 2.2. In fact, Xi ∼ Fi can be written as Xi = θi RUi + µ, where µ is a

constant, R is a random variable on (−∞, ∞) and Ui is uniformly distributed on (−1, 1)

independent of R. The result follows from Theorem 3.1 in Wang and Wang (2016) since
θi Ui ∼ U(−θi , θi ), i = 1, · · · , n. This ends the proof.

Suppose that Y has a distribution F and that θ has some distribution on (0, ∞) with a

distribution function H and, Y and θ are independent. Then the distribution of X = θY
3

is referred to as a scale mixture of F with a scale mixing distribution H. The following
corollary is a direct consequence of Lemma 2.1.
Corollary 2.1. The scale mixture of an unimodal-symmetric continuous distribution with
center µ is n-CM (n ≥ 2) with center µ.
In order to give the main results of this section, we first give a lemma which is closely
related to the φ-complete mixability and φ-joint mixability for some supermodular functions φ; see Bignozzi and Puccetti (2015).
Lemma 2.3. Suppose that F1 , · · · , Fn are n univariate continuous distribution functions,

g is a nonconstant continuous function on Rn , f is a nonconstant continuous function on
the real line. Then there exist n random variables Xi ∼ Fi and constant C such that
P (f (g(X1, · · · , Xn ))) = f (C)) = 1

(2.2)

P (g(X1, · · · , Xn ) = C) = 1.

(2.3)

if and only if

Proof. The proof of “if part” is obvious. Now we prove the “only if part”. Since
Fi ’s are continuous, for any n random variables Xi ∼ Fi (i = 1, 2, · · · , n), their joint

distribution function is continuous, and thus g(X1 , · · · , Xn ) is either an almost surely

constant random variable or a continuous random variable. So that f (g(X1, · · · , Xn ))
is either an almost surely constant random variable or a continuous random variable.
Whenever g(X1 , · · · , Xn ) is a continuous random variable, we have for any constant K,
P (f (g(X1, · · · , Xn )) = K) = 0.
Consequently, if (2.2) holds then it is necessary that (2.3) should hold, thus the result
follows.
Theorem 2.1. Suppose F is a continuous distribution with unimodal-symmetric density,
f is a nonconstant continuous function on the real line. For any integer n ≥ 2, there exist

n random variables Xi ∼ F (i = 1, 2, · · · , n) such that
!
!
n
X
P f
Xi = K = 1,

(2.4)

i=1

where K = f (C). Here C is the joint center of the n-tuple (F, · · · , F ). Moreover, if C is

unique, then K is unique.

4

Proof. Taking g(X1 , · · · , Xn ) =

Pn

i=1

Xi and Fi = F, i = 1, 2, · · · in Lemma 2.3, the

result follows from Lemma 2.1. This ends the proof.

Similarly, by using Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 we get the following theorem.
Theorem 2.2. Suppose that F is a continuous distribution with unimodal-symmetric
density, θ1 , · · · , θn are positive constants, f is a piecewise continuous function on the real
line. Then there exist n random variables Xi ∼ F and constant K such that
!
!
n
X
P f
θi Xi = K = 1

(2.5)

i=1

if and only if the scale inequality (2.1) is satisfied.

The complete mixability and joint mixability is a concept of negative dependence
(cf. Puccetti and Wang (2015a)) and not all univariate distributions F are n-CM. If the
supports of Fi (i = 1, 2, · · · , n) are unbounded from one side, then (F1 , · · · , Fn ) is not JM

for any n ≥ 1; see Remark 2.2 in Wang and Wang (2016). Now we list more examples
(The proof learned largely from Ruodu Wang).

Example 2.1. Assume F1 , · · · , F2n+1 are 2n + 1 univariate distribution functions with

n
symmetric densities on the same interval [−a, a] (a > 0), if Fi ( n+1
a) ≤

n+1
2n+1

(i =

1, 2, · · · , 2n + 1), then (F1 , · · · , F2n+1 ) is not JM.

n
Proof For any Xi ∼ Fi (i = 1, 2, · · · , 2n + 1), the conditions Fi ( n+1
a) ≤

1, 2, · · · , 2n + 1) imply that

P |Xi | >


n
2n
a >
, i = 1, 2, · · · , 2n + 1.
n+1
2n + 1

n+1
2n+1

It follows that



2n+1
X 
na
na
na
≥
P |Xi | >
− 2n
, · · · , |X2n+1| >
P |X1 | >
n+1
n+1
n+1
i=1
> (2n + 1)
Note that

(2n+1
X
i=1

Hence

Xi 6= 0

)

⊇


P

na
na
|X1 | >
, · · · , |X2n+1 | >
n+1
n+1
2n+1
X
i=1

Thus (F1 , · · · , F2n+1 ) is not JM.

2n
− 2n = 0.
2n + 1

Xi 6= 0

5

!

> 0.



.

(i =

Corollary 2.2. (Necessary Condition) Assume F1 , · · · , F2n+1 are 2n + 1 univariate dis-

tribution functions with symmetric densities on the same interval [−a, a] (a > 0), if
(F1 , · · · , F2n+1 ) is JM, then there exists some i (1 ≤ i ≤ 2n + 1) such that


1
n
a >
.
P |Xi | ≤
n+1
2n + 1
The interval [−a, a] in Example 2.1 can be changed as (−∞, ∞).
Example 2.2. Assume F1 , · · · , F2n+1 are 2n + 1 univariate distribution functions with

symmetric densities on the same interval (−∞, ∞), if there exists a > 0 such that


n
n
Fi (a) − Fi
a ≥
, i = 1, 2, · · · , 2n + 1,
n+1
2n + 1
then (F1 , · · · , F2n+1 ) is not JM.

The following example tells us the symmetry of F does not implied F is 3-CM and
that the unimodality assumption on the density can not removed.
Example 2.3 Assume that F has the following bimodal symmetric density
(
2r+1 2r
x , if x ∈ [−a, a],
2a2r+1
f (x) =
0,
if x ∈
/ [−a, a],
where r is a positive integer. The distribution is given by


if x < −a,

 0,
1
F (x) =
(x2r+1 + a2r+1 ) , if − a ≤ x < a,
2a2r+1


 1,
if x ≥ a.

It is easy to see that

1
1
2
+ 2r+2 < .
2
2 2
3
Thus (F, F, F ) is not JM. Or, equivalently, F is not 3-CM.
F

a

=

Example 2.4 Assume that F has the following bimodal symmetric density
(
2m
Cm √x1−x2 , if x ∈ (−1, 1),
fm (x) =
0,
if x ∈
/ (−1, 1),
where Cm is a normalizing constant and m ≥ 0 is an integer. When m = 0, fm is

the density of Pearson type II distribution, which is convex, bimodal and symmetric, so
6

that Lemma 2.1 can not applicable. Note that f0 is the density of cos θ or sin θ with
θ ∼ U(0, 2π) and thus it is n-CM for any integer n ≥ 2; see Puccetti, Wang and Wang

(2012) for more details. When m ≥ 1, using Example 2.1 one can checks that F is not

(2n + 1)-CM for not very large n. The (2n + 1)-complete mixability of this distribution is
not covered by any known theoretical results for large n. Further we consider a distribution
F with density
f (x) =

∞
X

αm fm (x),

m=1

where {αm }m≥1 is a sequence of positive values with

P∞

m=1

αm = 1. This distribution is

not (2n+1)-completely mixable for any n ≥ 1. Thus we give a counterexample to the Open

Problem 7 in Wang (2015) which states that are all absolutely continuous distributions
on a bounded interval n-CM for large enough n?

3

Elliptical Distributions and Related Families

3.1

Elliptical Distributions

Let Ψn be a class of functions ψ : [0, ∞) → R such that function ψ(|t|2 ), t ∈ Rn is an n-

dimensional characteristic function. It is clear that Ψn ⊂ Ψn−1 · · · ⊂ Ψ1 . Denote by Ψ∞

the set of characteristic generators that generate an n-dimensional elliptical distribution
for arbitrary n ≥ 1. That is Ψ∞ = ∩∞
n=1 Ψn .
Defination 3.1 The random vector X = (X1 , X2 , · · · , Xn )⊤ is said to have an elliptical

distribution with parameters µ and Σ, written as X ∼ En (µ, Σ, ψ), if its characteristic

function can be expressed as



ϕX (t) = exp it⊤ µ ψ t⊤ Σt⊤ , t ∈ Rn ,

(3.1)

for some column-vector µ, n × n positive semidefinite matrix Σ and for some function

ψ ∈ Ψn with ψ(0) = 1, which is called the characteristic generator. In general, elliptical

distributions can be bounded or unbounded, unimodal or multimodal. When ψ(u) =
exp(−u/2), En (µ, Σ, ψ) is the normal distribution Nn (µ, Σ) and when n = 1 the class of
elliptical distributions consists of the class of symmetric distributions. It is well known
that an n-dimensional random vector X ∼ En (µ, Σ, ψ) if and only if for any vector
7

α ∈ Rn , one has (Cambanis et al. (1981)) α⊤ X ∼ E1 (α⊤ µ, α⊤ Σα, ψ). In particular,
P
⊤
Xi ∼ E1 (µi , σi2 , ψ) and ni=1 Xi ∼ E1 (e⊤
n µ, en Σen , ψ).
The next result is due to Wang and Wang (2016) in which they proved the existence

of the dependence structure. Here we present two another proofs by finding the exact
dependence structure and by using Lemma 2.2, respectively.
Theorem 3.1. Suppose that Fi ∼ E1 (µi , σi2 , ψ), where µi ∈ R, σi > 0, ψ is a characteristic

generator for an n-elliptical distribution. Then (F1 , · · · , Fn ) is JM if the inequality
n
X
i=1

σi ≥ 2 max{σ1 , · · · , σn }

(3.2)

is satisfied.
Proof (First proof). Assume X ∼ En (µ, Σ, ψ), where µ = (µ1 , · · · , µn )⊤ and Σ =

(σij )n×n . Here

σij =

(

σi2 ,

if i = j,

1
(σk2
(n−1)(n−2)

−

P

l6=k

σl2 ),

if k 6= i 6= j.

It is straightforward to check that Σ is positive semidefinite under condition (3.2) and
the summation of all entries in Σ is zero. Each component Xi of X has distribution
P
E1 (µi , σi2 , ψ), i = 1, 2, · · · , n. The characteristic function of ni=1 Xi can be expressed as
!
!
n
n
X
X
ϕPni=1 Xi (t) = exp it
µi ψ(0) = exp it
µi , t ∈ R.
(3.3)
i=1

i=1

Hence,
P

n
X
i=1

and thus (F1 , · · · , Fn ) is JM.

Xi =

n
X
i=1

µi

!

= 1,

Second proof. We remark that if Fi ∼ E1 (µi , σi2 , ψ) has a density and ψ is a char-

acteristic generator for an n-elliptical distribution (n ≥ 2), then Fi is unimodal and

symmetric. Thus Theorem 3.1 is a direct consequence of Lemma 2.2.
The following result is a direct consequence of Theorem 3.1.

Corollary 3.1. Suppose that F ∼ E1 (µ, σ 2, ψ) with ψ ∈ Ψ∞ . Then F is n-CM for any
n ≥ 2.

8

Remark 3.1. Theorem 2.21 in Fang, Kotz and Ng (1990) shows that ψ ∈ Ψ∞ if and only

if F ∼ E1 (µ, σ 2 , ψ) is a mixture of normal distributions. Some such elliptical distributions

are normal distribution, the T -distribution, Cauchy distribution, Stable laws distribution
and Pearson type VII distribution; see Andrews and Mallows (1974) and Kano (1994).

Note that there are continuous, unimodal and symmetric densities do not belong to
the class of normal scale mixtures; see West (1987). Thus Corollary 3.1 is a special case
of Corollary 2.1. In the sequel, we list more examples.
Example 3.1 Consider the generalized logistic distribution with density
f (x) = C

exp(−αxβ )
, −∞ < x < ∞,
(1 + exp(−xβ ))2α

(3.4)

where C > 0, α > 0, β > 0 are constants. If α = 1 and β = 2, (3.4) is 1-dimensional
logistic distribution which is unimodal and symmetric but not a scale mixture of normal
densities; see Gómez-Sánchez-Manzano et al. (2006). If α = β = 1, (3.4) is standard
logistic distribution which is unimodal and symmetric and can be represented as a scale
mixture of normal densities; see Stefanski (1990).
Example 3.2 Kotz type distributions with density generator
g(r) = Cr N −1 exp(−mr β ), m, β > 0, N > 1
have symmetric and bimodal densities, the (2n + 1)-complete mixability of those Kotz
type distributions is not covered by any known theoretical results for n ≥ 1.

3.2

Slash-Elliptical Distributions

In this subsection, we investigate joint mixability of slash-elliptical distributions. We say
that a random variable X follows a slash elliptical distribution if it can be written as
X=

Z
1

Uq

+ µ,

(3.1)

where Z ∼ E1 (0, σ 2 , ψ) is independent of U ∼ U(0, 1) and q > 0 is the parameter related

to the distribution kurtosis. We use the notation X ∼ SE1 (µ, σ 2 , ψ; q). Similarly, we say

that a random vector X ∈ Rp has slash-elliptical multivariate distribution with vector
9

location parameter µ, positive semidefinite matrix scale parameter Σ, and tail parameter
q > 0, if it can be represented as

Z

(3.2)
1 + µ,
Uq
where Z ∼ Ep (0, Σ, ψ) is independent of U ∼ U(0, 1) and kurtosis parameter q > 0. We
X=

denote this as X ∼ SEp (µ, Σ, ψ; q). Properties of this family are discussed in Gómez,

Quintana and Torres (2007) and Bulut and Arslan (2015).

Using the representation (3.1), the following theorem is a consequence of Theorem 3.1.
Theorem 3.2. Suppose that Fi ∼ SE1 (µi , σi2 , ψ; q), where µi ∈ R, σi > 0, ψ is a charac-

teristic generator for an n-variate slash-elliptical distribution. Then (F1 , · · · , Fn ) is JM
if the inequality

n
X
i=1

is satisfied.

3.3

σi ≥ 2 max{σ1 , · · · , σn }

Skew-Elliptical Distributions

A univariate random variable Z has a skew-elliptical distribution if its probability density
function (pdf) is
2g(z)π(λz), −∞ < z < ∞,
where g is a pdf of univariate elliptical distribution with center 0, λ ∈ R and π is the

distribution function of g. We write Z ∼ SE1 (0, g, π, λ). In particular, if g is the pdf
of N(0, 1), then Z is called has a skew-normal distribution and write Z ∼ SN(µ, σ 2 , λ).
A random variable X follows a skew scale mixture of normal distribution with location
parameter µ ∈ R, scale parameter σ 2 and skewness parameter λ ∈ R if its pdf is given by


x−µ
g(x) = 2g0 (x)Φ λ
, x ∈ R,
σ
where λ ∈ R, Φ is the distribution function of N(0, 1) and g0 is the pdf of scale mixture

of normal distribution defined as

g0 (x) =

Z

∞

φ(x; µ, v 2 σ 2 )dH(v).

0

Here H is a (unidimensional) probability distribution function such that H(0) = 0. We
use the notation X ∼ SSMN(µ, σ 2 , λ, H). For more details see Andrews and Mallows
(1974) and Gómez-Sánchez-Manzano et al. (2006).
10

For complete mixability of skew-normal distribution, we have the following result.
Theorem 3.3. Suppose that F has the distribution SN(µ, σ 2 , λ), then F is not n-CM
(n ≥ 2) for sufficiently large |λ|.
d

Proof Assume random variable Xλ has the distribution F . Since Xλ = σX +µ, where
X ∼ SN(0, 1, λ), we prove the theorem for the case Xλ ∼ SN(0, 1, λ) only. It follows
from Henze (1986) that if Xλ ∼ SN(0, 1, λ), then it has the stochastic representation
d

Xλ = √

λ
1
|U| + √
V,
2
1+λ
1 + λ2

where U and V are independent N(0, 1) random variables. Moreover,
r
2
λ
.
E(Xλ ) = √
2
π
1+λ
Without loss of generality, we assume λ > 0. For any Ui and Vi are independent N(0, 1)
random variables, we have
P

√

λ
1 + λ2

n
X
i=1

|Ui | + √
n
X

1
1 + λ2

n
X

Vi > nE(Xλ )

i=1

n
X

!
n
\

1
λ
|Ui | + √
Vi ≥ 0}
2
1+λ
1 + λ2
i=1
i=1
i=2
!
n
\
λ
1
λ
1
≥P √
|U1 | + √
V1 > nE(Xλ ), { √
|Ui | + √
Vi ≥ 0}
2
1 + λ2
1 + λ2
1
+
λ
1 + λ2
i=2


1
λ
|U1 | + √
V1 ≤ nE(Xλ )
≥ 1−P √
1 + λ2
1 + λ2


n
X
λ
1
−
P √
|Ui | + √
Vi < 0 > 0,
2
2
1
+
λ
1
+
λ
i=2
≥P

√

λ
1 + λ2

|Ui | + √

1
1 + λ2

Vi > nE(Xλ ),

{√

for sufficiently large λ. This shows that the distribution SN(0, 1, λ) is not n-CM (n ≥ 2)
for sufficiently large |λ|.

Remark 3.2. For F ∼ SN(µ, σ 2 , λ), we conjecture that there exists an integer n0 (λ)

such that F is not n-CM for n ≤ n0 (λ) and, F is n-CM for n > n0 (λ); For an integer
n ≥ 2, there exists a λ0 (n) ≥ 0 such that F is n-CM whenever |λ| ∈ [0, λ0 (n)] and, F is
not n-CM whenever |λ| ∈ (λ0 (n), ∞).

Theorem 3.4. Suppose that F has the distribution SSMN(µ, σ 2 , λ, H), then F is not
n-CM (n ≥ 2) for sufficiently large |λ|.
11

!

Proof For any Xi ∼ SSMN(µ, σ 2 , λ, H) (i = 1, 2, · · · , n) and V ∼ H such that V is

independent of X1 , · · · , Xn . By the definition of skew scale mixture of normal distribution,
we have

Xi |V = v ∼ SN(µ, σ 2 v 2 , λv).
Then for any constant C and sufficiently large |λ|, using Theorem 3.3,
! Z
!
Z ∞
n
n
∞
X
X
P
Xi = C =
P
Xi = C|V = v dH(v) <
dH(v) = 1.
i=1

0

0

i=1

Thus F is not n-CM for sufficiently large |λ|.

4

Extensions to multivariate distributions

In this section we extent some results in Section 3 to the class of n-variate elliptically contoured distributions. We first introduce some notions. The notation vec(A) denotes the
⊤ ⊤
vector (a⊤
1 , · · · , an ) , where ai denotes the ith column of p × n matrix A, i = 1, 2, · · · , n.

we use A ⊗ B to denote the Kronecker product of the matrices A and B; We use tr(A)
to denote the trace of the square matrix A and etr(A) to denote exp(tr(A)) if A is a

square matrix. We use the following definition given in Gupta, Varga and Bodnar (2013).
Definition 4.1. Let X be a random matrix of dimensions p × n. Then, X is said to

have a matrix variate elliptically contoured distribution if its characteristic function has
the form
E(etr(iT⊤ X)) = etr(iT⊤ M)Ψ(tr(T⊤ ΣTΦ)).

(4.1)

with T : p × n, M : p × n, Σ : p × p, Φ : n × n, Σ ≥ 0 (positive semidefinite), Φ ≥ 0, and
Ψ : [0, ∞) → R. This distribution will be denoted by X ∼ Ep,n (M, Σ ⊗ Φ, Ψ).

The important special case of matrix variate elliptically contoured distribution is the
matrix variate normal distribution (X ∼ Np,n (M, Σ ⊗ Φ)), its characteristic function is


1 ⊤
⊤
⊤
(4.2)
E(etr(iT X)) = etr iT M − T ΣTΦ .
2
The next lemma shows that linear functions of a random matrix with matrix variate elliptically contoured distribution have elliptically contoured distributions also (see Theorem
2.2 in Gupta, Varga and Bodnar (2013)).
12

Lemma 4.1. Let X ∼ Ep,n (M, Σ ⊗ Φ, Ψ). Assume C : q × m, A : q × p, and B : n × m
are constant matrices. Then,

AXB + C ∼ Ep,n (AMB + C, AΣA⊤ ⊗ B⊤ ΦB, Ψ).
The next lemma gives the marginal distributions of a matrix variate elliptically contoured distribution (see Theorem 2.9 in Gupta, Varga and Bodnar (2013)).
Lemma 4.2. Let X ∼ Ep,n (M, Σ ⊗ Φ, Ψ), and partition X, M, and Φ as
X = (X1 , X2 ), M = (M1 , M2 ),
and
Φ=

"

Φ11 Φ12
Φ21 Φ22

#

,

where X1 is p × m, M1 is p × m, and Φ11 is m × m, 1 ≤ m < n. Then
X1 ∼ Ep,m (M1 , Σ ⊗ Φ11 , Ψ).
Theorem 4.1. Suppose that F ∼ Ep (0, Σ, Ψ), where Σ ≥ 0 is a p × p matrix, Ψ is a
characteristic generator for a p × n matrix variate elliptically contoured distribution (n ≥
2). Then there exist n p-dimensional random vectors X1 , · · · , Xn identically distributed
as F such that

P (X1 + · · · + Xn = 0) = 1.
Proof Using Lemma 4.2 we can choose X ∼ Ep,n (0, Σ ⊗ Φ, Ψ) with all marginals Xi ’s

(the ith column of X, i = 1, 2, · · · , n) have the same p-elliptical distribution Ep (0, Σ, Ψ),
where Φ ≥ 0 is an n × n matrix with diagonal elements are 1. Using Lemma 4.1 one finds

that X1 + · · · + Xn = Xen ∼ En (0, Σ ⊗ (etn Φen ), Ψ). Taking Φ = (1 − ρ)En + ρen eTn with

1
ρ = − n−1
, En is n × n identity matrix. It follows that

P (X1 + · · · + Xn = 0) = 1.

Acknowledgements.

We are grateful to Ruodu Wang for insightful comments and

valuable suggestions on the first manuscript. The research was supported by the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11571198, No. 11701319).

13

References
[1] Andrews, D. R. and Mallows, C. L. (1974). Scale mixtures of normal distributions.
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 36, 99-102.
[2] Bignozzi, V. and Puccetti, G. (2015). Studying mixability with supermodular aggregating fuctions. Statistics and Probability Letters 100, 48-55.
[3] Bulut, Y. M. and Arslan, O. (2015). Matrix variate slash distribution. Journal of
Multivariate Analysis 137, 173-178.
[4] Cambanis, S., Huang, S. and Simons, G. (1981). On the theory of elliptically contoured distributions. Journal of Multivariate Analysis 11, 368-385.
[5] Fang, K. T., Kotz, S. and Ng, K. W. (1990). Symmetric Multivariate and Related
Distributions. Chapman & Hall, London.
[6] Gaffke, N. and Rüscherndorf, L. (1981). On a class of extremal problems in statistics.
Mathematische Operationsforschung und Statistik. Series Optimization 12(1), 123135.
[7] Gómez-Sánchez-Manzano, E., Gómez-Villegas, M. A. and Marı́n, J. M. (2006). Sequences of elliptical distributions and mixtures of normal distributions. Journal of
Multivariate Analysis 97, 295-310.
[8] Gómez, H.W., Quintana, F. A. and Torres, F. J. (2007). A new family of slashdistributions with elliptical contours. Statistics and Probability Letters 77(7), 717725.
[9] Gupta, A. K., Varga, T. and Bodnar, T. (2013). Elliptically Contoured Models in
Statistics and Portfolio Theory (Second Edition), Springer New York.
[10] Henze, N. (1986). A probabilistic representation of the ‘skew-Normal’ distribution.
Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 13(4), 271-275.
[11] Kano, Y. (1994). Consistancy property of elliptical probability density functions.
Journal of Multivariate Analysis 51,139-147.
[12] Knott, M. and Smith, C. S. (2006). Choosing joint distributions so that the variance
of the sum is small. Journal of Multivariate Analysis 97, 1757-1765.

14

[13] Puccetti, G., Wang, B. and Wang, R. (2012). Advances in complete mixability. Journal of Applied Probability 49 (2), 430-440.
[14] Puccetti, G., Wang, B. and Wang, R. (2013). Complete mixability and asymptotic
equivalence of worst-possible VaR and ES estimates. Insurance: Mathematics and
Economics 53(3), 821-828.
[15] Puccetti, G. and Wang, R. (2015a). Extremal dependence concepts. Statistical Science 30(4), 485-517.
[16] Puccetti, G. and Wang, R. (2015b). Detecting complete and joint mixability. Journal
of Computational and Applied Mathmatics 280, 174-187.
[17] Rüschendorf, L. and Uckelmann, L. (2002). Variance minimization and random
variables with constant sum, in: Cuadras, et al. (Eds.), Distributions with Given
Marginals, Kluwer, 211-222.
[18] Stefanski, L. A. (1990). A normal scale mixture representation of the logistic distribution. Statistics & Probability Letters 11, 69-70.
[19] Wang, R. (2014). Asymptotic bounds for the distribution of the sum of dependent
random variables. Journal of Applied Probability 51(3), 780-798.
[20] Wang, R. (2015). Current open questions in complete mixability. Probability Surveys
12, 13-32.
[21] Wang, R., Peng, L. and Yang, J. (2013). Bounds for the sum of dependent risks and
worst value-at-risk with monotone marginal densities. Finance and Stochastics 17
(2), 395-417.
[22] Wang, B. and Wang, R. (2011). The complete mixability and convex minimization
problems with monotone marginal densities. Journal of Multivariate Analysis 102
(10), 1344-1360.
[23] Wang, B. and Wang, R. (2016). Joint mixability. Mathematics of Operations Research
41(3), 808-826.
[24] West, M. (1987). On scale mixtures of normal distributions. Biometrika 74(3), 646648.

15

