3
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to show that as $\alpha$ tends to 0, the gamma distribution $$\Gamma(\lambda,\alpha),$$ is properly standardised, tends to the standard normal distribution. I have figured out that the moment generating function for the gamma distribution is $$\left(\frac{\lambda}{\lambda-t}\right)^\alpha.$$ Also, I've worked out that the mean and variance of a gamma random variable is $$\frac{\alpha}{\lambda}$$ and $$\frac{\alpha}{\lambda^2}$$ respectively.

However, I am not sure how to proceed further. I tried by defining $$Z=\frac{X-\frac{\alpha}{\lambda}}{\frac{\alpha^0.5}{\lambda}}$$ and using the fact that $M_{_Z}(t) = e^{bt}M_{X}(at)$

However, I can't show that $$M_{_Z}(t)=e^{t^2/2}$$ which is the moment generating function of a standard normal random variable. Is this the correct way to proceed?

  • 1
    It seems you're using the notation $t$ for two distinct quantities. Take a close look, for example, at your second display equation.2011-06-22
  • 0
    The displayed function is not the mgf of anything I recognize. It is a really really bad idea to use $t$ as a parameter for the distribution and simultaneously as the variable of the mgf! If you write down the right mgf, scale it which is easy, the calculation will be a straightforward limit.2011-06-22
  • 0
    Two comments: you wrote $\alpha\to0$ but everybody below (and I) assumed you meant $\alpha\to+\infty$ instead. // The CLT argument in 6312's answer works for integer valued shapes (true, it can then be extended to non integer shapes but this is messy) while the MGF argument in Robert's answer works directly for all real valued shapes (despite the choice of notation $k$, which might seem to indicate that the shape should be an integer, this is not so).2011-06-23

2 Answers 2