7.3 Slutsky’s Theorem

The limit theorems above concern a single sequence. In practice one almost always meets a combination — a quantity converging in distribution, divided by an estimate of its standard deviation which converges in probability to a constant. Slutsky’s theorem is what licenses treating the second as though it already were that constant, and almost every asymptotic argument in statistics uses it.

Theorem 7.3.1 (Slutsky). Suppose \(X_n \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } X\) and \(Y_n \underset {P}{\longrightarrow } c\), where \(c\) is a constant. Then

(a)
\(X_n + Y_n \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } X + c\);
(b)
\(X_nY_n \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } cX\);
(c)
\(\dfrac {X_n}{Y_n} \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } \dfrac {X}{c}\), provided \(c\neq 0\).

Proof. Because the limit \(c\) is a constant, \(Y_n \underset {P}{\longrightarrow } c\) gives joint convergence \((X_n,Y_n)\underset {D}{\longrightarrow }(X,c)\) — this is the step that fails for a non-constant limit, since the marginal behaviour of two sequences does not determine their joint behaviour. Each of the three maps \[(x,y)\mapsto x+y,\qquad (x,y)\mapsto xy,\qquad (x,y)\mapsto x/y\] is continuous at every point of the form \((x,c)\), the last provided \(c\neq 0\). The continuous mapping theorem applied to the pair then gives the three conclusions. □

Note. The requirement that \(c\) be a constant is not a technicality that can be relaxed. If \(X_n\underset {D}{\longrightarrow }X\) and \(Y_n\underset {D}{\longrightarrow }Y\) with \(Y\) non-degenerate, then nothing follows about \(X_n+Y_n\) at all: take \(X_n\sim N(0,1)\) and \(Y_n=-X_n\), so that each converges in distribution to \(N(0,1)\), while \(X_n+Y_n=0\) identically. Taking instead \(Y_n\) independent of \(X_n\) gives \(X_n+Y_n\sim N(0,2)\). The marginals are the same in both cases and the limits differ, which is precisely the point.

Example 7.3.2. Let \(X_1,\dots ,X_n\) be independent and identically distributed with mean \(\mu \) and finite variance \(\sigma ^{2}\), and let \(S_n^{2}\) be the sample variance. Show that \[\frac {\sqrt {n}\left (\overline {X}-\mu \right )}{S_n} \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } Z\sim N(0,1).\]

Solution. By the central limit theorem, \[\frac {\sqrt {n}\left (\overline {X}-\mu \right )}{\sigma } \underset {D}{\longrightarrow } Z\sim N(0,1).\] By the weak law applied to \(X_i^{2}\) and to \(X_i\), together with the continuous mapping theorem, \(S_n^{2}\underset {P}{\longrightarrow }\sigma ^{2}\) and hence \(\sigma /S_n \underset {P}{\longrightarrow } 1\), the square root and the reciprocal both being continuous at \(\sigma ^{2}>0\). Writing \[\frac {\sqrt {n}\left (\overline {X}-\mu \right )}{S_n} = \underbrace {\frac {\sqrt {n}\left (\overline {X}-\mu \right )}{\sigma }}_{\underset {D}{\longrightarrow }\,Z} \ \cdot \ \underbrace {\frac {\sigma }{S_n}}_{\underset {P}{\longrightarrow }\,1},\] part (b) of Slutsky’s theorem gives the product converging in distribution to \(1\cdot Z = Z\).

Remark. This example is the reason the theorem matters. The unknown \(\sigma \) has been replaced by an estimate at no asymptotic cost, and that substitution is what makes large-sample confidence intervals and tests usable — one does not need to know the variance to use the normal approximation, only to estimate it consistently. For finite \(n\) under normality the exact distribution is \(t\) with \(n-1\) degrees of freedom; Slutsky’s theorem says the difference washes out as \(n\) grows, which is why the \(t\) and normal tables agree in their lower rows.

Questions on this section

Stuck on something here? Ask below and it stays attached to this topic.