A university is looking to fill one vacant faculty position. There are candidates whom the university interviews sequentially , and assigns a score in the range immediately after interviewing. Before the interviews, it is known that the scores of the candidates are independently and uniformly distributed in . For , the university interviews the candidate only if it rejects all previous candidates numbered to . If the university selects the candidate, it cannot interview candidates numbered to and the selection process terminates immediately. The goal of the university is to maximize the expected score of the selected candidate. Let be the minimum score of the first candidate for which the university selects him under the optimal policy . Find Enter as your answer if you believe that the above limit does not exist.
Image courtesy: Google
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Relevant wiki: Continuous Probability Distributions - Uniform Distribution
For ease of typing, we will rescale the range of score to [ 0 , 1 ] by dividing the score of each candidate by 1 0 0 .
Let the cut-off score of the first candidate be t . Also, let the random variable Z n denote the score of the selected candidate (from n candidates) and X 1 denote the score of the first candidate. Then we can write down Z n in terms of Z n − 1 as follows: Z n = 1 ( X 1 ≥ t ) X 1 + 1 ( X 1 < t ) Z n − 1 . Taking expectations of both sides and recalling that X 1 ⊥ Z n − 1 , we have E ( Z n ) = E ( X 1 1 ( X 1 ≥ t ) ) + P ( X 1 < t ) E ( Z n − 1 ) = ∫ t 1 x d x + t E ( Z n − 1 ) = 2 1 ( 1 − t 2 ) + t E ( Z n − 1 ) . The optimal threshold t = M n ∗ is obtained by setting the derivative of E ( Z n ) w.r.t. t to 0 , yielding M n ∗ = E ( Z n − 1 ) . Thus, we have the following recursion for M n ∗ : M n ∗ = 2 1 ( 1 + ( M n − 1 ∗ ) 2 ) , with M 1 ∗ = 0 . Define ϵ n = ( 1 − M n ∗ ) , n ≥ 1 . This yields the following recursion in ϵ n : ϵ n = ϵ n − 1 − 2 1 ϵ n − 1 2 , ( 1 ) with ϵ 1 = 1 . It is easy to show that ϵ n ↘ 0 . Hence, we have ϵ n − 1 ϵ n = 1 − 2 1 ϵ n − 1 ⟶ n → ∞ 1 . ( 2 ) From Eqn. (1), we have ∀ k ≥ 2 : ϵ k ϵ k − 1 ϵ k − ϵ k − 1 = − 2 1 ϵ k ϵ k − 1 . Summing up the above for k = 2 to n and dividing both sides by n , we have n 1 − n ϵ n 1 = − 2 1 ( n 1 k = 2 ∑ n ϵ k ϵ k − 1 ) . Taking limit as n → ∞ and using the Cesaro mean theorem in conjunction with (2), we have
n → ∞ lim n ( 1 − M n ∗ ) = 2 .
The answer finally follows by scaling back the limit, i.e., multiplying both sides by 1 0 0 .