Why the First Two Probabilities Matter
A Panjer recursion specifies how probabilities relate after the sequence has started, but a recursion that begins at count 2 does not itself set the probabilities of counts 0 and 1. Those two values are the boundary probabilities \(p_0=P(N=0)\) and \(p_1=P(N=1)\). They determine the scale of the remaining probabilities, while the requirement that all probabilities sum to one constrains their possible values.
The key distinction is between a finite and an infinite total weight for the positive-count terms. When that weight is finite and the terms are nonnegative, normalization allows a range of boundary pairs unless one boundary value or another condition is supplied. When the weight is infinite, any positive \(p_1\) would give infinite total probability, so the only normalized choice is \(p_1=0,\ p_0=1\).
Weights Generated From the Recursion
For fixed \(a\) and \(b\), define the weight \(w_1=1\) and generate further weights using the same factors as the probability recursion. This separates the shape of the positive-count sequence, determined by \(a,b\), from its scale, determined by \(p_1\).
If all the weights are nonnegative, define their total by \(W=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}w_n\), allowing \(W=\infty\). Because \(w_1=1\), the weights are not all zero. The sum \(W\) is the total positive-count mass per unit of \(p_1\); it is not itself a probability.
Set \(w_1=1\). This makes the formula \(p_1=p_1w_1\) hold at the boundary.
For each \(n\ge 2\), multiply the preceding weight by \(a+b/n\). Then \(w_n=(a+b/n)w_{n-1}\).
Induction gives \(p_n=p_1w_n\) for all \(n\ge1\), including cases where a weight becomes zero.
Add the zero-count probability to the positive-count probabilities: \(p_0+p_1W=1\) when \(W\) is finite.
Normalization and the Boundary Pair
The recursion does not involve \(p_0\). Consequently, normalization is applied to the full sequence, not just to its first two terms: the probabilities for counts 2 and above must also be included. The following result gives the exact constraint when the weights are nonnegative.
- If \(W=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}w_n<\infty\), a normalized sequence has \(p_1=t\) and \(p_0=1-Wt\), where \(0\le t\le 1/W\). Conversely, every such \(t\) gives a normalized nonnegative sequence.
- If \(W=\infty\), normalization requires \(p_1=0\) and \(p_0=1\). This gives the distribution concentrated at zero.
For finite \(W\), the result follows by summing the positive-count probabilities: \(\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p_n=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}p_1w_n=p_1W\). Thus total probability is one exactly when \(p_0+p_1W=1\). Nonnegativity requires \(p_1\ge0\) and \(p_0=1-p_1W\ge0\), giving \(0\le p_1\le1/W\). Since \(w_1=1\), \(W\ge1\), so this interval is well-defined. The recursion then verifies that all the terms have the required form.
If \(W=\infty\) and \(p_1>0\), the positive-count sum is \(p_1W=\infty\), which cannot be part of a probability distribution. Therefore \(p_1=0\). The recursion then gives \(p_n=0\) for every \(n\ge2\), and normalization forces \(p_0=1\). This infinite-weight case is not an exception to normalization: it makes the normalized boundary pair unique.
If any weight is negative, a positive \(p_1\) would make the corresponding \(p_n=p_1w_n\) negative. Thus a valid distribution in that case must have \(p_1=0,\ p_0=1\). In applications, check nonnegativity as well as the weight sum; a finite sum alone does not make a sequence a valid distribution.
Worked Example: A Finite Weight Sum and a Given Zero Probability
Let \(N\) have a Poisson distribution with parameter 1, so \(p_n=e^{-1}/n!\) for \(n\ge0\). Its probabilities satisfy the \((a,b,1)\) recursion with \(a=0,\ b=1\). Suppose only the recursion coefficients and \(p_0=e^{-1}\) are used to recover \(p_1\). Find \(p_1\), \(p_2\), and \(p_3\). Method: construct the weights and normalize. Mistake avoided: setting \(p_0+p_1=1\) while omitting the probabilities for counts 2 and above.
With \(a=0,\ b=1\), the recursion factor at count \(n\) is \(1/n\). Starting with \(w_1=1\), the next weights are $$ w_2=\frac{1}{2},\qquad w_3=\frac{1}{3}\cdot\frac{1}{2}=\frac{1}{6},\qquad w_4=\frac{1}{4}\cdot\frac{1}{6}=\frac{1}{24}. $$ In general \(w_n=1/n!\), so $$ W=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{n!}=e-1. $$
Since \(p_0=e^{-1}\), normalization gives $$ p_1=\frac{1-p_0}{W} =\frac{1-e^{-1}}{e-1} =\frac{(e-1)/e}{e-1} =\frac{1}{e}. $$ Then $$ p_2=p_1w_2=\frac{1}{2e},\qquad p_3=p_1w_3=\frac{1}{6e}. $$ As a check, the full positive-count mass is \(p_1W=(1/e)(e-1)=1-e^{-1}\); adding \(p_0=e^{-1}\) gives 1. The example has a finite weight sum, and the supplied \(p_0\) selects one member of the allowable boundary family.
Worked Example: A Finite-Support Sequence and Its Endpoint
Let \(N\sim\operatorname{Binomial}(3,1/3)\). Show how its recursion determines the positive-count weights, recover \(p_1\) from \(p_0\), and check the endpoint. Method: use the binomial probability ratio to identify \(a,b\), then apply the finite-weight normalization equation. Mistake avoided: continuing a finite-support sequence with nonzero probabilities after its endpoint.
For \(n=2,3\), the ratio of consecutive binomial probabilities is $$ \frac{p_n}{p_{n-1}} =\frac{4-n}{n}\cdot\frac{1/3}{2/3} =-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{2}{n}. $$ Thus \(a=-1/2\) and \(b=2\). The weights are $$ w_1=1,\qquad w_2=-\frac12+\frac22=\frac12,\qquad w_3=\left(-\frac12+\frac23\right)w_2 =\frac16\cdot\frac12=\frac{1}{12}, $$ and $$ w_4=\left(-\frac12+\frac24\right)w_3=0. $$ Every subsequent weight is also zero, because its recurrence multiplies the preceding zero. Therefore $$ W=1+\frac12+\frac{1}{12}=\frac{19}{12}. $$
The zero probability is \(p_0=(2/3)^3=8/27\). Hence $$ p_1=\frac{1-p_0}{W} =\frac{1-8/27}{19/12} =\frac{19}{27}\cdot\frac{12}{19} =\frac{12}{27}=\frac49. $$ The next probabilities are $$ p_2=p_1w_2=\frac49\cdot\frac12=\frac29,\qquad p_3=p_1w_3=\frac49\cdot\frac{1}{12}=\frac{1}{27},\qquad p_4=p_1w_4=0. $$ Check the total: \(8/27+12/27+6/27+1/27=27/27=1\). The zero weight at count 4 is the endpoint; the class recursion does not imply positive probabilities beyond it.
Worked Example: Infinite Total Weight Forces Degeneracy
Suppose \(a=1,\ b=0\), so \(p_n=p_{n-1}\) for every \(n\ge2\). Determine the only normalized distribution in this class. Method: examine the weights before applying normalization. Mistake avoided: treating the normalization equation as if it always left a free choice of \(p_0,p_1\).
Here each recursion factor equals 1. Therefore $$ w_1=1,\quad w_2=1,\quad w_3=1,\quad\ldots,\qquad W=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}1=\infty. $$ If \(p_1>0\), the recursion gives \(p_n=p_1\) for every \(n\ge1\), and the sum of positive-count probabilities diverges. A probability distribution cannot have that total, so \(p_1=0\). The recursion then gives \(p_n=0\) for all \(n\ge2\), and normalization gives \(p_0=1\). The sequence \((1,0,0,\ldots)\) satisfies the recursion and sums to one, confirming the result.
How to Use the Boundary Constraint
When the weights are nonnegative and \(W\) is finite, knowing either boundary probability determines the other: $$ p_1=\frac{1-p_0}{W}\quad\text{if }p_0\text{ is given},\qquad p_0=1-p_1W\quad\text{if }p_1\text{ is given}. $$ The result must satisfy \(0\le p_1\le1/W\). If it does not, the proposed boundary value is inconsistent with a normalized nonnegative sequence.
If only \(a,b\) are given and \(W\) is finite with nonnegative weights, normalization constrains the boundary pair but does not generally select one pair: every \(p_1\) in \([0,1/W]\), with \(p_0=1-Wp_1\), is possible under the recursion. An additional condition, such as a specified \(p_0\), is needed to select a particular pair. In contrast, when the nonnegative weights have infinite sum, normalization itself forces \(p_1=0,\ p_0=1\). When the weights include a negative term, nonnegativity also rules out a positive \(p_1\).
A useful exam check is to calculate the first few weights, including any zero or negative factor, before manipulating a sum. Then decide whether \(W\) is finite or infinite and only after that apply normalization. This order prevents both overlooking a finite-support endpoint and assuming a positive-count distribution exists when the weights do not permit one.
Check Your Understanding
For each problem, first check the weights, then use normalization where applicable.
- For \(a=0,\ b=2\), the weights are \(w_n=2^{n-1}/n!\). If \(p_0=e^{-2}\), find \(p_1\). (Answer: \(2e^{-2}\))
- For \(a=0,\ b=1\), the weights are \(w_n=1/n!\). If \(p_1=1/4\), find \(p_0\). (Answer: \(1-(e-1)/4\))
- For \(a=-1/2,\ b=2\), the weights are \(1,1/2,1/12,0,\ldots\). If \(p_1=1/3\), find \(p_0\). (Answer: \(17/36\))
- For \(a=1,\ b=0\), can a normalized sequence have \(p_0=1/5\)? (Answer: No; the weights sum to infinity, so the only normalized sequence has \(p_0=1,\ p_1=0\).)
- For \(a=-1,\ b=1\), determine whether a valid normalized sequence can have \(p_1>0\). The first generated weight is \(w_2=-1/2\). (Answer: No; \(p_2=p_1w_2<0\) if \(p_1>0\), so the only valid sequence has \(p_1=0,\ p_0=1\).)