I saw this question, and was wondering what is the best way to describe a random distribution of points in the plane such that the expected number of points in any region of unit area is $c$, where $c$ is a given positive constant, and such that the number of points in every pair of disjoint regions are independent. $\def\lfrac#1#2{{\large\frac{#1}{#2}}}$
I can mimic the derivation of the Poisson distribution in the following manner:
- Take any $n \in \mathbb{N}_{>c}\,\,.$ Partition each unit square of the plane into an $n \times n$ grid of square cells.
- With probability $\lfrac{c}{n^2}$ put a point into each cell, distributed uniformly within the cell, independently of other cells.
- Then every region comprising $n^2$ cells has expected number of points $c$.
- Also every pair of disjoint regions have independent numbers of points.
- Now if $n \to \infty$, I presume that this will more and more accurately resemble the desired distribution of points.
But I have no idea how to take such a limit, nor what the limit distribution is!. I suspect it might be important that the cells are getting smaller in both dimensions, but I don't know. (If each square is partitioned into $n$ horizontal rectangles instead, each rectangle comprising $1 \times n$ cells, and the probability changed to $\lfrac{c}{n}$, the number of points in two vertical regions each comprising $n^2 \times 1$ cells will not be independent. This dependence might not affect the final limiting distribution, if such a limit exists at all, but a priori it is not clear to me.)
So how can we rigorously define such a distribution, and is it really the limit of the above concept, in which case how do we rigorously define this limit?
Thanks to Michael and Shalop for the core ideas, here is a rigorous definition and proof. $ \def\nn{\mathbb{N}} \def\zz{\mathbb{Z}} \def\rr{\mathbb{R}} \def\pp{\mathbb{P}} \def\ee{\mathbb{E}} \def\ii{\mathbf{1}} \def\wi{\subseteq} \def\none{\varnothing} \def\t{\text} \def\lsum{{\large\sum}} \def\lfrac#1#2{{\large\frac{#1}{#2}}} $
Definition
Theorem
Proof
For each measurable $R \wi \rr^2$, let $N_R = \#( P \cap R )$.
[First we prove the 1-square case.]
Take any $a,b \in \zz$ and disjoint measurable $Q,R \wi S_{a,b}$.
Let $x = 1-|Q|-|R|$ and $y = |Q|$ and $z = |R|$.
Given any $m,n \in \nn$:
$\pp( ⟨N_Q,N_R⟩ = ⟨m,n⟩ ) = \lsum_{k=0}^\infty e^{-c} \lfrac{c^{k+m+n}}{(k+m+n)!} \binom{k+m+n}{k,m,n} x^k y^m z^n$
$\ = e^{-c} \lfrac{c^{m+n}}{m!n!} y^m z^n \lsum_{k=0}^\infty \lfrac{(cx)^k}{k!}$ $= e^{-c} \lfrac{c^{m+n}}{m!n!} y^m z^n e^{cx}$ $= e^{-cy} \lfrac{(cy)^m}{m!} \ e^{-cz} \lfrac{(cz)^n}{n!}$.
$\pp(N_Q=m) = \pp(⟨N_Q,\none⟩ = ⟨m,0⟩) = e^{-cy} \lfrac{(cy)^m}{m!}$ and likewise $\pp(N_R=n) = e^{-cz} \lfrac{(cz)^n}{n!}$.
Therefore $N_Q,N_R$ are independent and $N_Q \sim \t{Pois}(c|Q|)$ and $N_R \sim \t{Pois}(c|R|)$.
[Now we prove the general case.]
Note that the 1-square case extends easily [by induction] to the finite-squares case.
For each measurable $R \wi \rr^2$, let $T_k = \bigcup_{a,b \in \{-k..k\}} S_{a,b}$ and $N_{R,k} = \#( P \cap R \cap T_k )$.
Take any disjoint measurable $U,V \wi \rr^2$ such that $|U|,|V|$ are finite.
Given any $m,n \in \nn$:
For $k \in \nn$ as $k \to \infty$:
$\pp( N_U \le m ) \approx \pp( N_{U,k} \le m )$ [by MCT for sets]
$\ = \pp( \t{Pois}(c|U \cap T_k|) \le m )$ [by the finite-squares case and sum of Poisson r.v.]
$\ \approx \pp( \t{Pois}(c|U|) \le m )$ [by MCT for sets]
$\pp( N_U \le m \land N_V \le n )$
$\ \approx \pp( N_{U,k} \le m \land N_{V,k} \le n )$ [by MCT for sets]
$\ = \lsum_{i=0}^m \lsum_{j=0}^n \pp( N_{U,k} = i \land N_{V,k} = j )$
$\ = \lsum_{i=0}^m \lsum_{j=0}^n \pp( N_{U,k} = i ) \ \pp( N_{V,k} = j )$ [by the finite-squares case]
$\ = \pp( N_{U,k} \le m ) \ \pp( N_{V,k} \le n )$
$\ \approx \pp( N_U \le m ) \ \pp( N_V \le n )$ [by MCT for sets].
Therefore $\pp( N_U \le m ) = \pp( \t{Pois}(c|U|) \le m )$
and $\pp( N_U \le m \land N_V \le n ) = \pp( N_U \le m ) \ \pp( N_V \le n )$.
Therefore $N_U \sim \t{Pois}(c|U|)$ and $N_U,N_V$ are independent.
Notes
At all the marked points we are implicitly using MCT for sets, which states the following:
Take any set $T$ such that $|T|$ is finite, and any sequence $(S_k)_{k\in\nn}$ of measurable sets such that $S_k \wi T$ for every $k \in \nn$ and $S_k \to S$ monotonically as $k \to \infty$. Then $|S_k| \to |S|$ as $k \to \infty$.