arXiv:1901.01847v2 [math.PR] 11 Apr 2019 . u farno ubro admvrals23 to approximation CP approximation 4.3 CP of Accuracy 4.2 theorem limit CP approximation 4.1 Poisson Compound 4. patterns match Long 3.2 runs head Long variables 3.1 random Applications of number random 3. a of Sum 2.6 expansions Asymptotic variables2.5 random integer-valued Dependent variables2.4 random integer-valued Independent variables 2.3 random Bernoulli Dependent variables 2.2 random Bernoulli approximation Independent Poisson 2.1 of Accuracy variables 2. random Bernoulli Dependent 1.2 law variables Poisson random a Independent to 1.1 convergence Weak 1. Content 62E20. Classification: Subject AMS patterns. match t long approximation, runs, head process long Poisson expansions, asymptotic imation, words: Key .References approximation 6. process Poisson 5. ain smttcepnin,ec eae eut nthe well. on as results presented Related are of approximation estimates etc. Poisson theorem, expansions, limit asymptotic general mation, the including issues of otedsrbto fasmo enul n,mr generally more and, Bernoulli of variables. sum random a o valued problem of the distribution to paid the is to attention main The surveys. existing eoeve eut ntetpco oso prxmto th approximation Poisson of topic the on results overview We eidct ubro pnpolm n ics directions discuss and problems open of number a indicate We ed o etitorevst atclrmto,adover and method, particular a to ourselves restrict not do We oso prxmto,cmon oso prxmto,accurac approximation, Poisson compound approximation, Poisson B oso approximation Poisson ( ,p n, 01,6F5 05,6G1 05,6G0 07,62E17, 60J75, 60G70, 60G55, 60G51, 60G50, 60F05, 60E15, ) D nvriyLondon University MDX S.Y.Novak Abstract eso 2 version 1 h cuayo approxi- of accuracy the oso approximation Poisson f cuayo compound of accuracy o-eaieinteger- non-negative , iwtewoerange whole the view ffrhrresearch. further of tlvraindistance, variation otal taemse in missed are at fapprox- of y 34 32 32 29 27 26 21 20 18 16 43 38 36 8 6 3 2 2 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 2

1 Weak convergence to a Poisson law

Poisson approximation appears natural in situations where one deals with a large number of rare events. The topic has attracted a considerable body of research. It has important applications in insurance, extreme value theory, reliability theory, mathematical biology, etc. (cf. [7, 12, 51, 63, 79]). However, existing surveys are surprisingly sketchy, and miss not only a number of results obtained during the last three decades but even some classical results going back to 1930s. The paper aims to fill the gap. We present a comprehensive list of results on the topic of Poisson approximation, and formulate a number of open problems. Related results on the topic of compound Poisson approximation are presented as well.

1.1 Weak convergence to a Poisson law We denote by Π(λ) a Poisson law with parameter λ. The following Poisson limit theorem is due to Gnedenko [47] and Marcinkiewicz [71]. Hereinafter multiplication is superior to division.

Let Xn,1, ..., Xn,kn n 1, where kn is a non-decreasing sequence of natural numbers, ≥ be a triangle{ array of independent} random{ } variables (r.v.s). Random variables X are called infinitesimal if { n,k}

lim max IP( Xn,k >ε) 0 ( ε>0). (1) n k kn →∞ ≤ | | → ∀ Denote B =( ε; ε) (1 ε;1+ε), ε − ∪ −

Sn = Xn,1 + ... + Xn,kn .

Theorem 1 [47, 71] If X are infinitesimal r.v.s, then { n,k} (S ) Π(λ) ( λ>0) (2) L n ⇒ ∃ as n if and only if for any ε (0;1), as n , →∞ ∈ →∞ IP( X 1 <ε) λ, (3) | n,k − | → Xk IP(X /B ) 0, IEX 1I X <ε 0, (4) n,k ∈ ε → n,k {| n,k| }→ Xk Xk IEX2 1I X <ε IE2X 1I X <ε 0. (5) n,k {| n,k| } − n,k {| n,k| } → Xk
The following corollary presents necessary and sufficient conditions for the weak con- vergence of a sum of independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) non-negative integer- valued r.v.s to a Poisson random variable. Let IN denote the set of natural numbers, and let Z :=IN 0 . + ∪{ } S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 3

Corollary 2 If Xn,1, ..., Xn,kn n 1 is a triangle array of independent random variables { } ≥ taking values in Z such that X =d X (1 i k ), then (2) holds if and only if + n,i n,1 ≤ ≤ n k IP(X =1) λ and IP(X 2)/IP(X 1) 0. (6) n 1,n → n,1 ≥ n,1 ≥ → Note that (6) yields IP(X 1) IP(X =1) as n . n,1 ≥ ∼ n,1 →∞ The second relation in (6) means X′ 1 as n , where r.v. X′ has the n,1 →p →∞ n,1 distribution (X′ )= (X X =0). L n,1 L n,1| n,1 6

In the case of Bernoulli B(pn,k) random variables relations (4) and (5) trivially hold, (3) means

p λ (n ), (3∗) n,k → →∞ Xk while (1) states that maxk pn,k 0 as n . The latter together with (3∗) is equivalent to → →∞ 2 p 0 (n ). (1∗) n,k → →∞ Xk

Thus, conditions (1∗) and (3∗) are necessary and sufficient for the weak convergence (2).

Example 1.1. Let X , ..., X be i.i.d. random variables with the distribution { n,1 n,n} IP(X =0)=1 λ/n 1/n1.5, IP(X =1) = λ/n, IP(X =n)=1/n1.5 (λ>0). − − Then (1) and (6) hold, hence (S ) Π(λ). Note that IES / λ. ✷ L n ⇒ n → The proof of Theorem 1 can be found in [49]. A compound Poisson limit theorem (weak convergence of (S ) to a compound Pois- L n son law, where Sn is a sum of i.i.d. random variables that are equal to 0 with a large probability) has been given by Khintchin ([58], ch. 2.3).

1.2 Dependent Bernoulli random variables The topic of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of dependent Bernoulli r.v.s has applications in extreme value theory, reliability theory, etc. (cf. [7, 12, 63, 79]). Let Xn,1, ..., Xn,n n 1 be a triangle array of 0-1 random variables such that sequence ≥ X , ...,{ X is stationary} for each n IN. For instance, in extreme value theory one often n,1 n,n ∈ has X = 1I Y >u , n,k { k n} where Y , i 1 is a stationary sequence of random variables and u is a sequence of { i ≥ } { n} “high” levels. The special case where Yi, i 1 is a moving average is related to the topic of the Erd¨os–R´enyi partial sums (cf. [79],{ ch.≥ 2).} S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 4

Let (τ) be the σ–field generated by the events X , l i m. Set Fl,m { n,i} ≤ ≤ α (l) = sup IP(AB) IP(A)IP(B) , ϕ(l) = sup IP(B A) IP(B) , n | − | | | − | βn(l) = sup IEsup IP(B 1,m) IP(B) , B | |F − | where the supremum is taken over m 1, A (τ), B such that IP(A)>0. ≥ ∈F1,m ∈Fm+l+1,n Conditions involving mixing coefficients αn( ), βn( ),ϕn( ) are slightly weaker than those involving traditional mixing coefficients α( ),· β( ),ϕ· ( ). · · · ·

Condition ∆ is said to hold if αn(ln) 0 for some sequence ln of natural numbers such that 1 l n. → { } ≪ n ≪ Class . If ∆ holds, then there exists a sequence r of natural numbers such that R { n} 1 2/3 n r l 1, nr− α (l ) 0 (n ) (7) ≫ n ≫ n ≫ n n n → →∞ (for instance, one can take r = [ n max l ; nα (l ) ]). We denote by the class of all n { n n n } R such sequences r . p { n} Set Sn = Xn,1 + ... + Xn,n, λn = IESn.

Let ζr,n be a r.v. with the distribution

(ζ )= (S S >0). (8) L r,n L r | r In extreme value theory (ζ ) is known as the cluster size distribution. L r,n Theorem 3 Assume condition ∆. If, as n , →∞ S π ( λ>0), (9) n ⇒ λ ∃ then ζ 1 (n ) (10) r,n →p →∞ for any sequence r =rn obeying (7). If there exists{ the limit}

λ lim IP(Xn,1 =...=Xn,n =0) = e− ( λ>0) (11) n →∞ ∃ and (10) holds for some r =r , then S π . { n}∈R n ⇒ λ Theorem 3 generalises Corollary 2 to the case of dependent α-mixing r.v.s. Condition (11) is an analogue of (3); it means that IP(X =0) are “properly small”. n,i 6 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 5

Condition (10) prohibits asymptotic clustering of rare events. In the case of indepen- dent r.v.s taking values in Z assumption (10) means X′ 1 as n , where r.v. + n,1 →p →∞ X′ has the distribution (X′ )= (X X =0). n,1 L n,1 L n,1| n,1 6

Remark 2.1. The following condition (D′) has been widely used in extreme value theory (cf. [63, 79]): r 1 − lim n IP(Xn,i+1 =0,Xn,1 =0)=0 (D′) n 6 6 →∞ Xi=1 for any sequence r = r such that n r 1. Condition (D′) means that there is no { n} ≫ n ≫ asymptotic clustering of extremes. It was introduced by Loynes [68]. Closely related is the following condition

r 1 − lim IP(Xn,i+1 =0 Xn,1 =0)=0. (D˜ ′) n 6 | 6 →∞ Xi=1

If conditions ∆ and (11) hold, then (D′) is equivalent to (D˜ ′). Indeed, one can check that ∆ and (11) yield

IP(S >0) λr/n (n ) (12) r ∼ →∞ (cf. (16) below). Denote p = IP(X =0). Then n,1 6 λr/n IP(S >0) rp, λ+o(1) np. ∼ r ≤ ≤

Hence (D′) (D˜ ′). ⇒ By Bonferroni’s inequality,

λr/n IP(Sr >0) rIP(Xn,1 =0) IP 1 i

r 1 − 1 IP(S >0)/rp 1 IP(X =0 X =0) , (13) ≥ r ≥ − n,i+1 6 | n,1 6 Xi=1 r 1 − λ+o(1) 1 IP(X =0 X =0) np. (14) ≥ − n,i+1 6 | n,1 6  Xi=1 

Thus, np is bounded away from 0 and above, and (D′) is equivalent to (D˜ ′). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 6

Remark 2.2. Condition (10) is weaker than (D′): if conditions ∆ and (11) hold, then (D′) entails (10). Indeed, ζ 1 by construction. Note that r,n ≥

IP(Sr >1) = IP 1 i

Thus, IP(Sr >1) = o(r/n) if (D′) holds. In view of (12), IP(ζr,n >1) 0 as n , i.e., (10) holds. → →∞

Remark 2.3. If conditions ∆ and (D′) hold, then (11) is equivalent to

lim nIP(Xn,1 =0) = λ. (3′) n →∞ 6 Indeed, this follows from (12), (13) and (16) (cf. [63], Theorem 3.4.1).

A generalisation of Corollary 2 to the case of stationary ϕ-mixing r.v.s has been given by Utev [105], Theorem 10.1, who has shown that conditions (3′) and (D′) are necessary and sufficient for (9). Sufficient conditions for Poisson convergence without assuming sta- tionarity have been provided by Sevastyanov [97]. A Poisson limit theorem in the case of a two-dimentional random field X has been given by Banis [8]. { i,j}

Proof of Theorem 3. Let r = rn be an arbitrary sequence from . Condition ∆ and Lemma 2.4.1 from [63] imply{ that} for any t IR, as n , R ∈ →∞ n IEexp (itS ) = exp IP(S >0)IE eitSr 1 S >0 + o(1), (15) n r r − | r    n/r n IP(Sn = 0) = IP (Sr =0)+ o(1) = exp IP(Sr >0) + o(1) (16) − r  (cf. (5.10) in [79]). λ If (9) holds, then so does (11): IP(Sn =0) e− as n . Note that (11) and (16) yield (12). Since → →∞ itSn it IEe exp(λ(e 1)) ( t IR) (9∗) → − ∀ ∈ by the assumption, (15) and (12) entail IEeitζr,n eit, i.e., (10) holds. On the other hand, if (10) and (11) hold for→ some r = r , then (12) is valid. { n} ∈ R Relations (12) and (15) yield (9∗). ✷

2 Accuracy of Poisson approximation

The problem of evaluating the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum Sn = X1 + ... +Xn S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 7 of independent 0-1 random variables has attracted a lot of attention among researchers (cf. [12, 79] and references wherein). A natural task is to obtain a sharp estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of (S ). In this section we overview available estimates. L n Historically, the accuracy of Poisson approximation was first studied in terms of the uniform distance (sometimes called the Kolmogorov distance). The uniform distance d (X; Y ) d (F ; F ) between the distributions of random K ≡ K X Y variables X and Y with distribution functions (d.f.s) FX and FY is defined as

dK(FX ; FY ) = sup FX (x) FY (x) . x | − |

Many authors evaluated the accuracy of Poisson approximation to (S ) in terms of L n the total variation distance. Recall that the total variation distance dT V(X; Y ) between the distributions of r.v.s X and Y is defined as

dT V(X; Y ) dT V( (X); (Y )) = sup IP(X A) IP(Y A) , ≡ L L A | ∈ − ∈ | ∈A where is a Borel σ-field. Evidently, d (X; Y ) d (X; Y ). Note that A K ≤ T V

dT V(X; Y ) = inf IP(X′ = Y ′), X′,Y ′ 6 where the infimum is taken over all random pairs (X′,Y ′) such that (X′)= (X) and L L (Y ′)= (Y ) [42, 23]. L The Gini-KantorovichL distance between the distributions of r.v.s X and Y with finite first moments (known also as the Kantorovich–Wasserstein distance) is

dG (X; Y ) dG ( (X); (Y )) = sup IEg(X) IEg(Y ) , (17) ≡ L L g | − | ∈F where = g : g(x) g(y) x y is the set of Lipschitz functions. Note that F { | − |≤| − |}

dG (X; Y ) = inf IE X′ Y ′ , (18) X′,Y ′ | − | where the infimum is taken over all random pairs (X′,Y ′) such that (X′)= (X) and L L (Y ′)= (Y ) [106]. If X and Y take values in Z , then [85] L L + d (X; Y )= IP(X i) IP(Y i) . G | ≥ − ≥ | Xi 1 ≥

Distance dG was introduced by Kantorovich [56] (to be precise, Kantorovich has intro- duced a class of distances that includes dG ). We add the name of Gini since Gini [46] used IE X Y -type quantities. Barbour et al. [12] called d the “Wasserstein distance” after | − | G Dobrushin [42] attributed it to Vasershtein [107]. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 8

If distributions P1 and P2 have densities f1 and f2 with respect to a measure µ, set 1 2 d2 (P ; P ) := f 1/2 f 1/2 dµ =1 f f dµ. H 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 Z  −  − Z p

Then dH denotes the Hellinger distance. It is known that

2 2 dH dT V dH 2 dH . (19) ≤ ≤ q − Denote 2 2 χ (P1; P2)= (dP1/dP2 1) dP2. ZsuppP2 − By the Cauchy-Bunyakovski inequality,

2d (P ; P ) χ(P ; P ). T V 1 2 ≤ 1 2 We denote by 2 dKL(P1; P2)= ln(dP1/dP2) dP1 ZsuppP2 the Kullback–Leibler divergence. According to Pinsker’s inequality,

d d /√2 . (20) T V ≤ KL 2 Though dKL is not a metric, it plays a role in statistics (cf. [50]) and in the theory of large deviations (cf. [79], p. 324, ex. 41). Certain other distances can be found in [67, 79, 90]. Below we present estimates of the accuracy of Poisson approximation for (S ) in terms of d , d and d distances. L n K T V G 2.1 Independent Bernoulli r.v.s We denote by B(n, p) the Binomial distribution with parameters n and p. Let Π(λ) denote the Poisson distribution with parameter λ; we denote by πλ a Poisson Π(λ) random variable. Let X1,X2, ..., Xn be independent Bernoulli B(pi) r.v.s. Denote λ = IESn,

n n p = IP(X =1) (i 1), λ = pk (k 2), θ = p2/λ. i i ≥ k i ≥ i Xi=1 Xi=1 Many authors worked on the problem of evaluating the accuracy of Poisson approxi- mation to (S ) in terms of the uniform distance d , the total variation distance d L n K T V and the Gini–Kantorovich distance dG . It seems natural to approximate B(n, p) by the Poisson distribution. For instance, in the case of identically distributed Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s X one has { i} IP(S =k) IP(S =k N =n) = IP(π (p)=k π (1)=n), (21) n ≡ n | n n | n S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 9 where N n is the total number of 0’s and 1’s among X ,X , ..., X and π (t), t [0; 1] n ≡ 1 2 n { n ∈ } is a Poisson jump process on [0; 1] with intensity rate n. Thus,

B(n, p)= (π (p) π (1)=n). (21∗) L n | n Tsaregradskii [103] has shown that π IEeitX IEeitY dK(FX ; FY ) | − |dt (22) ≤ Z π 4 t − | | if X and Y are integer-valued r.v.s, and derived the estimate

2 2p(2 p) d (B(n, p); Π(np)) pπ e − /16(1 p) (p (0;1/2]). (23) K ≤ − ∈ Note that π2/16 0.617. Inequality (23) seems to be the first estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation≈ with explicit constant. In the case of non-identically distributed Bernoulli B(pi) random variables Franken [43] has shown that d (S ; π ) 0.6p∗ K n λ ≤ n if pn∗ := maxi n pi 1/4. Shorgin [100] has proved that ≤ ≤ d (S ; π ) c θ/(1 √θ ) (θ<1) K n λ ≤ 1 − where c1 = (1+ π/2)/2 < 1.13. According to Daley & Vere-Jones [36], p d (S ; π ) 0.36θ. K n λ ≤ Roos [90] has shown that

dK(Sn; πλ) 1/2e +1.2√θ/(1 √θ) θ. ≤  −  Note that 1/2e 0.184. ≤ Kontoyiannis et al. [60] have shown that

n 2 1 3 d (S ; π ) λ− p /(1 p ). H n λ ≤ i − i Xi=1 Borisov & Vorozheikin [24] present sharp lower and upper bounds to χ2(B(n, p); Π(np)):

0 χ2(B(n, p); Π(np)) p2/2 2p3/3n p4/(1 p)+ p8(23 20p)/(1 p)2. ≤ − − ≤ − − − 2 Harremo¨es & Ruzankin [50] present lower and upper bounds to dKL(B(n, p); Π(np)). In particular, they have shown that

2d2 (B(n, p); Π(np))=( p ln(1 p))(1+O(1/n)). KL − − − S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 10

Many authors worked on the problem of evaluating the total variation distance dT V(Sn; πλ) (cf. [12, 79] and references wherein). Prohorov [84] has established the existence of an ab- solute constant c such that

d (B(n, p); Π(np)) cp. (24) T V ≤ Kolmogorov [59] points out that

n d (S ; π ) C p2, T V n λ ≤ i Xi=1 where C is an absolute constant. LeCam [64, 65] attributes inequality

n d (S ; π ) p2 (25) T V n λ ≤ i Xi=1 to Khintchin [58]. Bound (25) is sharp: according to (2.10) in Deheuvels & Pfeifer [38],

d (S ; π ) np2(1+O(p)) T V n λ ≥ in the case of i.i.d. Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s if np 0. → Note that (25) is a consequence of the property of dT V and the following fact:

p 2 d (B(p); Π(p)) = (1 e− )p p . (26) T V − ≤ Indeed, denote X¯ =(X , ..., X ), π¯ =(π , ..., π ), where π are independent Poisson 1 n p1 pn { pi } Π(pi) r.v.s. Then

n n 2 d (S ; π ) d (X¯;¯π) d (X ; π ) p . (25′) T V n λ ≤ T V ≤ T V i pi ≤ i Xi=1 Xi=1 Setp ˜ = ln(1 p ) (1 i n), and put µ = n p˜ . According to Serfling [96], i − − i ≤ ≤ i=1 i nP d (S ; π ) p˜2/2. T V n µ ≤ i Xi=1 Kerstan [57] has shown that d (S ; π ) 1.05θ. (27) T V n λ ≤ Romanowska [87] has noticed that

d (B(n, p); Π(np)) p/2 1 p . (28) T V ≤ − p S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 11

The popular estimate n 1 λ 2 d (S ; π ) λ− (1 e− ) p (29) T V n λ ≤ − i Xi=1 is effectively due to Barbour and Eagleson [9].

Presman [83] has established an estimate of dT V(Sn; πλ) with the constant 0.83 at the leading term. In the case of i.i.d. Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s Presman’s bound becomes

d (B(n, p); Π(np)) 0.83p/(1 p)(1 1/n). (30) T V ≤ − − Xia [110] has derived an estimate with the constant 0.6844 at the leading term. Roos [90] (see also Cekanaviˇciusˇ & Roos [31]) has obtained a bound with a correct constant 3/4e 0.276 at the leading term: if θ<1, then ≈ d (S ; π ) 3θ/4e(1 √θ )3/2 . (31) T V n λ ≤ − Note that θ/(1 √θ )3/2 θ(1+1.5√θ +3.75θ). − ≥ Roos [90] has shown also that

d (S ; π ) 3θ/4e T V n λ ∼ if θ 0 and λ 1 as n . Thus, constant 3/4e cannot be improved. → → →∞ Denote

1/2 pn∗ = max pi , ε = min 1;(2π[λ pn∗ ])− +2δ/(1 pn∗ /λ) , i n ≤ n − − o λ n λ n 1 e− 2 1 e− 3 δ = − p , δ∗ = − p . λ i λ i Xi=1 Xi=1

2 Note that δ δ∗ . The following inequality from [79], Theorem 4.12, sharpens the second- ≤ order term of the right-hand side (r.h.s.) of estimate (31):

2 d (S ; π ) 3θ/4e +2δ∗ε +2δ . (32) T V n λ ≤ In the case of (S )= B(n, p) estimate (32) becomes L n np 2 np 2 2 d (S ; π ) 3p/4e + 2(1 e− )p ε + 2(1 e− ) p , (32∗) T V n np ≤ − − 1/2 np where ε = min 1;(2π[(n 1)p])− + 2(1 e− )p/(1 1/n) . The second-order term in { 2 3 − − − } (32∗) is of order p np . ∧ In applications one often has λ λ(n) as n . Hence estimates with the λ ≡ → ∞ → ∞ “magic factor” (1 e− )/λ attract special interest. − λ The possibility of the “super–magic” factor e− when one approximates S A for n ∈ a bounded A has been discussed in [79], ch. 4.5 (such approximations are of interest in S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 12 extreme value theory). For instance, if X are independent Bernoulli B(p ) r.v.s and { i} i A = 0 , then { } n λ+p∗ 2 0 IP(π =0) IP(S =0) e− n p /2. (33) ≤ λ − n ≤ i Xi=1

i 1 pj n pi 2 Indeed, set c = − e− (1 p ). Since e− 1+p p /2 by Taylor’s formula, i j=1 j=i+1 − j − i ≤ i Q Q n n ∗ pi λ+p 2 IP(π =0) IP(S =0) = (e− 1+p )c e− n p /2. λ − n − i i ≤ i Xi=1 Xi=1 In the case of the Binomial B(n, p) distribution (33) becomes

1 2 (n 1)p 2n 0 IP(π =0) IP(S =0) np e− − . (33∗) ≤ np − n ≤ 2 ≤ e2(n 1)2 − Note that 2/e2 0.2707. ≈ Bound (32) is a consequence of inequality

⋆ 2 ⋆ IP(S A) IP(π A) IP(π +1 A) IP(π A) θ/2+2δ∗ε +2δ . (32 ) | n ∈ − λ ∈ |≤| λ ∈ − λ ∈ | The first term on the r.h.s. of (32⋆) has the “super–magic” factor if A is finite.

Estimates in terms of the Gini-Kantorovich distance are available as well. Denote n µ = ln(1 p ). If p∗ 1/2, then − i=1 − i n ≤ P n d (S ; π ) p2/2(1 p ) (34) G n µ ≤ i − i Xi=1 (Deheuvels et al. [40]). Witte [109] has shown that

√eλ ∗ 2pn d (Sn; πλ) − ln(1 2θe ). (35) G ≤ 2√2π − According to [79], formula (4.53),

n d (S ; π ) 1 4 2/eλ p2. (36) G n λ ≤ ∧ 3 i  p  Xi=1 Roos [90] has shown that

√ √ √ √ dG (Sn; πλ) 1/ 2e +1.6 θ(2 θ)/(1 θ) θ λ . (37) ≤  − −  A recent survey is Zacharovas & Hwang [114]. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 13

Sharp non-Poisson approximation to the Binomial B(n, p) distribution function IP(S n ≤ ) has been given by Zubkov & Serov [120]. · Denote by Φ the standard normal d.f.. Let

Λ(x)= x ln(x/p)+(1 x) ln ((1 x)/(1 p)) (0Bernoulli distribution B(p) (cf. [79], p. 322), and set

Zn,p(k) = Φ sgn(k/n p) 2nΛ(k/n) .  − p  Then [120] Z (k) IP(S k) Z (k+1). (38) n,p ≤ n ≤ ≤ n,p The following large deviations inequality is due to Bernstein [21], p. 168:

IP((S np)/√npq > t (1 + γ ) < exp( t2/2) (t>0), n − p,n − 2 3 3 where q =1 p, γp,n = tp,n(q p)/6+ t (p +q )/12, tp,n = t/√npq . − − p,n d S π Asymptotics of TV( n; λ). The asymptotics of dT V(Sn; πλ) in the case of identi- cally distributed Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s has been established by Prohorov [84]:

√ dT V(B(n, p); Π(np)) = p/ 2πe 1+ O(1 (p +1/√np )) . (39)  ∧  Kerstan [57], Deheuvels & Pfeifer [37, 39], Deheuvels et al. [40] and Roos [89] have gen- eralised (39) to the case of non-identically distributed 0-1 r.v.s. Deheuvels & Pfeifer [37] present also the asymptotics of d (S ; π ) in the case where λ const as n . T V n λ → →∞ The following result concerning the asymptotics of dT V(Sn; πλ) uses the notation from [79], ch. 4. Given a non-negative integer-valued random variable Y, we denote by Y ⋆ a random variable with the distribution

IP(Y ⋆ =k) = IP(Y =k)(k λ)2/λ (k Z ). (40) − ∈ + The next bound is a consequence of Theorem 11.

Theorem 4 If X , ..., X are independent Bernoulli r.v.s, (X )= B(p ), then 1 n L i i ⋆ 2 d (S ; π ) θd (π ; π +1)/2 2δ∗ε +2δ . (41) | T V n λ − T V λ λ | ≤ One can check that ⋆ √ dT V(πλ; πλ +1) = 2/πe + O(1/ λ ) (42) p as λ . Thus, →∞ √ √ dT V(Sn; πλ)= θ/ 2πe 1+ O(θ+1/ λ ) (43)   S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 14 if λ and θ 0 as n . →∞ → →∞

Example 2.1. Let pi =1/i, i IN. Then pn∗ =1, λ = λ(n) , θ 0 as n , and (43) entails d (S ; π ) θ/√2∈πe . → ∞ → →∞ ✷ T V n λ ∼ Deheuvels et al. [40] have shown that

λ [λ] 3/2 d (S ; π ) λ e− λ /[λ]! 2(2θ) √λ/(1 √2θ) (θ<1/2). | G n λ − 2 | ≤ − Borisov & Vorozheikin [24] present asymptotic expansions of χ2(B(n, p); Π(np)).

Shifted Poisson approximation. Shifted (translated) Poisson approximation to B(n, p) has been considered by a number of authors (see [16, 19, 29, 62, 80] and refer- ences therein). The accuracy of shifted Poisson approximation can be sharper than that of pure Poisson approximation. Another advantage of using shifted Poisson approxima- tion is the possibility to derive a more general result (e.g., a uniform in p estimate of dT V(B(n, p); Π(np)), cf. (45) below). Let X , ..., X be independent 0-1 r.v.s. Set p =IP(X =1), q =1 p , 1 n i i i − i λ = IES , σ2 =var S , λ = λ σ2. n n 2 − Denote [x] = max k Z: k x , x = x [x]. We define r.v. { ∈ ≤ } { } −

Y = [λ2]+πλ [λ2]. −

Note that var πλ var Sn =λ2, while var Y var Sn = λ <1. The following− result is due to Cekanaviˇciusˇ − & Vaitkus{ } [29].

Theorem 5 If σ2 4, then ≥ 3 2 σ2/4 d (S ; Y ) 0.93σ− λ + λ /(σ + λ )+ e− . (44) T V n ≤ 2 { 2} { 2} Let X be i.i.d. Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s. Then the right-hand side (r.-h.s.) of (44) is { i} O p/n +1/np . p  A similar bound in terms of the uniform distance has been established by Kruopis [62]. Set q =1 p, where 04, 2 1+1/√e 2+4/√π sup dT V(Sn; Y ) + (n>4). (45) 0 p 1/2 ≤ √π √n 2 n 2√n ≤ ≤ − − S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 15

Theorem 6 can be compared with the Berry–Esseen inequality

d (B(n, p); (np, npq)) C/√np K N ≤ (see, e.g., [99]) as well as with the results by Meshalkin [72] and Pressman [82]. Estimate (45) is uniform in p [0; 1/2]. Note that a uniform in p [0;1/2] Berry–Esseen estimate would be infinite. Inequality∈ (45) has advantages over Meshalkin’s∈ [72] and Pressman’s [82] results as the constants in (45) are explicit (which matters in applications); besides, the structure of the approximating distribution (Y ) is simpler and does not assign mass to negative numbers. Bound (45) is preferable toL (29) – (32) if p>4e/√n .

An estimate of the accuracy of shifted Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of Bernoulli B(pi) r.v.s in terms of the Gini-Kantorovich distance has been given by Barbour & Xia [19] in the assumption that λ2 is an integer.

Poisson approximation to the multinomial distribution. Results on the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of Bernoulli r.v.s can be generalised to the case of a multinomial distribution. Let S¯n be a random vector with multinomial distribution B(n, p1, ..., pm):

n! l1 lm n l IP(S¯ = l¯)= p ...p (1 p) − , (46) n l !...l !(n l)! 1 m − 1 m − ¯ where li Z+ ( i), l =(l1, .., lm), l = l1 +...+ lm n, p = p1 +...+ pm. Formula∈ (46)∀ describes, in particular, the joint≤ distribution of the increments of the empirical d.f.. Note that d S¯n = ξ¯1 +...+ ξ¯n, (47) ¯ ¯ ¯ where ξ, ξ1, ..., ξn are i.i.d. random vectors with the distribution

IP(ξ¯=0)=1¯ p , IP(ξ¯=¯e )= p (1 j m), − j j ≤ ≤ th vectore ¯j has the j coordinate equal to 1 and the other coordinates equal to 0. Let π¯ =(π1, ..., πm) be a vector of independent Poisson r.v.s with parameters np1, ..., npm, and let πn( ) denote a Poisson jump process on [0; 1] with intensity rate n. Thenπ ¯ is a vector of increments· of process π ( ): π =d π (p ),..., π =d π (p) π (p p ). Note that n · 1 n 1 m n − n − m

IP(S¯ = ¯l ) = IP(π (p )=l , ..., π (p) π (p p )=l π (1)=1) (46∗) n n 1 1 n − n − m n | n (cf. (21)). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 16

Arenbaev [6] has shown that

d (S¯ ;¯π)= p/√2πe (1 + O(1 1/√np )) (48) T V n ∧ if n (the term 1/√np in (48) apparently needs to be replaced with p +1/√np , cf. →∞ (39)). Arenbaev ([6], formulas (5)–(9′)) has shown also that ¯ dT V(Sn;¯π)= dT V(B(n, p); Π(np)). (49)

Using (49) and (32), we deduce

np 2 d (S¯ ;¯π) 3p/4e + 4(1 e− )p . (50) T V n ≤ − According to Deheuvels & Pfeifer [38],

d (S¯ ;¯π) K max 16p2;5np3 , (51) | T V n − n,λ| ≤ { } 2 np α np β np where K = np e− (np) − (α np)/α! (np) − (β np)/β! /2, n,λ − − −
α = np+1/2+ np+1/4 , β = np+1/2 np+1/4 . p − p The case of non-identically distributed random vectors ξ¯1, ..., ξ¯n has been treated by Roos [93]. A generalisation of (50) to the case of a stationary sequence of dependent r.v.s is given in [79], Theorem 6.8.

Open problem. 2.1. Improve the constants in (34)–(36). 2.2. Generalise Theorem 6 to the case of m-dependent r.v.s.

2.2 Dependent Bernoulli r.v.s We present below generalisations of (25) and (29) to the case of dependent Bernoulli r.v.s. Let X1, ..., Xn be (possibly dependent) Bernoulli r.v.s. Chen [27] pioneered the use of Stein’s method in deriving estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation, and obtained an estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of ϕ-mixing r.v.s. Set pi =IP(Xi =1 X1, ..., Xi 1). A generalisation of (25) has been given by Serfling [96]: | − n n 2 d (S ; π ) (IEp ) + IE p IEp , (25∗) T V n λ ≤ i | i − i| Xi=1 Xi=1

2 n n d (S ; π ) (IEp )2 + IE p IEp . (52) K n λ ≤ π i | i − i| Xi=1 Xi=1 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 17

Let X , a J be a family of dependent Bernoulli B(p ) random variables. Assign to { a ∈ } a each a J a “neighborhood” B J such that X , b J B are “almost independent” ∈ a ⊂ { b ∈ \ a} of Xa (for instance, if Xb are m–dependent r.v.s and J = 1, ..., n , then Ba = [a m; a+m] J). { } { } − ∩ The idea of splitting the sample into “strongly dependent” and “almost independent” parts goes back to Bernstein [20] (see also [97]). Denote S = Xa, λ = IES, Xa J ∈ and let

δ1 = IEXaIEXb , δ2 = IEXaXb,

Xa J bXBa Xa J b BXa a ∈ ∈ ∈ ∈ \{ }

δ3 = IE IEXa IE Xa Xb . b J Ba − n ∈ \ o Xa J X ∈ The following Theorem 7 is cited from Arratia et al. [2] and Smith [101].

Theorem 7 There holds

λ 1 e− d (S; π ) − δ + δ + min 1; 2/eλ δ . (53) T V λ λ 1 2 3 ≤   { p }

In the case of independent random variables one can choose Ba = a , then (53) coincides with (29). { } Theorem 7 has applications to the problem of Poisson approximation to the distribution of the number of long head runs in a sequence of Bernoulli r.v.s, and to the problem of Poisson approximation to the distribution of the number of long match patterns in two sequences (e.g., DNA sequences, see [12, 79] and references therein). The topic concerning (S ) in the case of stationary dependent r.v.s X has ap- L n { i} plications in extreme value theory [63, 79]. The case where the sequence X1, ..., Xn is a moving average is related to the topic concerning the so-called Erd¨os–R´enyi maximum of partial sums (cf. [79], ch. 2). Estimates of the accuracy of Poisson approximation for some special types of depen- dence among X , a J can be found in Barbour et al. [12]. An estimate of the accuracy { a ∈ } of shifted Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of dependent Bernoulli B(pi) r.v.s in terms of the total variation distance is given by Cekanaviˇciusˇ & Vaitkus [29]. A generalization of Theorem 7 to the case of compound Poisson approximation has been given by Roos [88].

Open problem. 2.3. Improve the constants in (53). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 18

2.3 Independent integer-valued r.v.s The topic of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of integer-valued r.v.s has applications in extreme value theory, insurance, reliability theory, etc. (cf. [7, 12, 63, 79]). For instance, in insurance applications the sum S = n Y 1I Y >y of integer-valued n i=1 i { i i} r.v.s allows to account for the total loss from the claimsP exceeding excesses yi . One would be interested if Poisson approximation to (S ) is applicable. { } L n In extreme value theory one often deals with the number of extreme (rare) events represented by a sum Sn = ξ1 + ... + ξn of 0-1 r.v.s (indicators of rare events). The r.v.s ξ1, ..., ξn can be dependent. One way to cope with dependence is to split the sample into blocks, which can be considered almost independent (the so-called Bernstein’s blocks approach [20]). The number of r.v.s in a block is an integer-valued r.v.; thus, the number of rare events is a sum of almost independent integer-valued r.v.s. In all such situations one deals with a sum of non-negative integer-valued r.v.s that are non-zero with small probabilities, and Poisson or compound Poisson approximation to (S ) appears plausible. An estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the L n distribution of Sn can indicate whether Poisson approximation is applicable. The problem of evaluating the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of independent non-negative integer-valued r.v.s has been considered, e.g., in [10, 11, 79]. Inequality (25) and the Barbour-Eagleson estimate (29) have been generalised to the case of non-negative integer-valued r.v.s by Barbour [10]. Theorem 8 below presents another result of that kind (see [79], ch. 4.4). Let X1,X2, ..., Xn be independent non-negative integer-valued r.v.s,

Sn = X1 + ... + Xn, λ = IESn,

πλ denotes a Poisson Π(λ) r.v.. Franken [43] has shown that 2 n d (S ; π ) (IE2X + IEX (X 1)) K n λ ≤ π i i i − Xi=1 n n 2 Denote λ∗ = i=1IP(Xi =1), λ2∗ = i=1IP(Xi =1) . Kerstan [57] has proved that P nP d (S ; π ∗ ) IP(X 2) + min λ∗;1.05λ∗/λ∗ . T V n λ ≤ i ≥ { 2 2 } Xi=1 An early survey on the topic is Witte [109]. Given a random variable Y that takes values in Z+, let Y ∗ denote a random variable with the distribution

IP(Y ∗ =m)=(m+1)IP(Y = m+1)/IEY (m 0). (54) ≥ Distribution (54) differs by a shift from the distribution introduced by Stein [102], p. 171. d Note that Y ∗ = Y if and only if (Y ) is Poisson. L S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 19

Theorem 8 As n 1, ≥ n 1 λ d (S ; π ) λ− (1 e− ) d (X ; X∗)IEX , (55) T V n λ ≤ − G i i i Xi=1 n 4 d (S ; π ) min 1; 2/eλ d (X ; X∗)IEX . (56) G n λ ≤ 3 G i i i n p o Xi=1

In the case of Bernoulli B(p ) r.v.s one has X∗ 0, and (55) coincides with (29). i i ≡ In the case of i.i.d.r.v.s (55) becomes

λ d (S ; π ) (1 e− )IE X X∗ . T V n λ ≤ − | − |

Here X∗ may be chosen independent of X, although one would prefer to define X and X∗ on a common probability space in order to make IE X X∗ smaller. A generalisation of (32) to the case of independent integer-valued| − | r.v.s has been given by Novak [80].

Example 2.2. Let ξ,X1,X2, ... be i.i.d.r.v.s with geometric Γ0(p) distribution:

IP(ξ =m)=(1 p)pm (m 0). − ≥

Then Sn is a negative Binomial NB(n, p) r.v..

Set r =p/(1 p). Vervaat [108] has shown that dT V(Sn; πλ) r, while Romanowska [87] has noticed that−d (S ; π ) r/√2. Roos [92] has shown that≤ T V n λ ≤ d (NB(n, p); Π(np)) min 3r/4e; nr2 , (57) T V ≤ { } d (NB(n, p); Π(np)) nr2. (58) G ≤ m 2 It is easy to see that IP(X∗ =m)=(m+1)p (1 p) . Hence i − d Xi∗ = Xi + ξ, (59) and IE X X∗ = p/(1 p). Note that | − | −

λ = nIEξ = nr, dG (X; X∗) = IEξ = r. Theorem 8 entails

nr d (S ; π ) (1 e− )r, (60) T V n λ ≤ − 4 2 dG (Sn; πλ) min 1; 3 2/enp nr . (61) ≤ n p o Inequality (60) has been established in [10], p. 758; estimate (61) is from [79], formula (4.53). ✷ S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 20

Shifted Poisson approximation. A number of authors dealt with shifted Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum Sn of integer-valued r.v.s (see [16, 80] and references therein). Let

λ = IES , σ2 = var S , a = [λ σ2], b = λ σ2 , µ = σ2 + b, n n − { − } where [x] and x = x [x] denote the integer and the fractional parts of x. Barbour & Cekanaviˇciusˇ{ } − [16] have shown that

n 2 d (S ; a+π ) (1 σ− ) b + d ψ + IP(S

2 2 where dn = maxi n dT V(Sn,i; Sn,i+1), Sn,i = Sn Xi, ψi = σi IEXi(Xi 1)+ IEXi σi IE(Xi ≤ 2 − − | − | − 1)(Xi 2) + IE Xi(Xi 1)(Xi 2) , σi = varXi. In− the Binomial| case− (i.e.,− |(S ) = B(n, p)) the r.-h.s. of (62) is O( p/n +1/np). L n Further reading on the topic is [80]. p An estimate of the accuracy of shifted Poisson approximation to the distribution of a random sum of i.i.d. integer-valued r.v.s has been presented by R¨ollin [86].

2.4 Dependent integer-valued r.v.s

Let X1, ..., Xn be (possibly dependent) non-negative integer-valued r.v.s. Set pi = IP(Xi = 1 X1, ..., Xi 1). A generalisation of (25∗), (52) has been given by Serfling [96]: | − n d (S ; π ) IE2p + IE p IEp + IP(X 2) , (25+) T V n λ ≤ i | i − i| i ≥ Xi=1
n d (S ; π ) 2 IE2p + IE p IEp + IP(X 2) . (52+) K n λ ≤ π i | i − i| i ≥ Xi=1   Below we present a generalisation of Theorem 7. Let Xa, a J be a family of r.v.s taking values in Z+. Suppose one can choose the “neighborhoods”{ ∈ }B so that r.v.s X , b J B are independent of X . We call this { a} { b ∈ \ a} a assumption the “local dependence” condition. Let (π ) denote a Poisson Π(λ) r.v.. Set L λ

δ1∗ = IEXaIEXb , δ4 = dG (Xa; Xa∗)IEXa, Xa J b BXa a Xa J ∈ ∈ \{ } ∈ and let δ1, δ2, δ3 be defined as in Theorem 7. Theorems 9 and 10 are from [79], ch. 4.

Theorem 9 If X , b J B are independent of X , then { b ∈ \ a} a λ 1 e− d (S ; π ) − (δ∗ + δ + δ ) . (63) T V n λ ≤ λ 1 2 4 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 21

In Theorem 10 we drop the local dependence condition assumed in Theorem 9.

Theorem 10 Denote δ5 = a J IEXa(Xa 1)1I Xa 2 . Then ∈ − { ≥ } P λ 1 e− d (S ; π ) − δ + δ + δ + min 1; 2/eλ δ . (64) T V n λ λ 1 2 5 3 ≤   { p } Ruzankin [95] presents an estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to IEh(Sn), where h is an unbounded function.

Open problem. 2.4. Improve the constants in (63), (64).

2.5 Asymptotic expansions

Let X1, ..., Xn be independent Bernoulli B(pi) r.v.s, and let πλ be a Poisson random variable. Formal expansions of IP(Sn x) have been given by Uspensky [104], see also Franken [43]. Herrmann [52], Shorgin [100]≤ and Barbour [10] present full asymptotic expansions with explicit estimates of the error terms. Kerstan [57], Kruopis [62] and Cekanaviˇciusˇ & Kruopis [28] present first-order asymptotic expansions. Asymptotic expansions for IEh(Sn) IEh(πλ) in the case of independent 0-1 r.v.s Xk and unbounded function h have been− given by Barbour et al. [13] and Borisov & Ruzankin{ } [22]. The formulation of the full asymptotic expansions is cumbersome and will be omitted. We present below first-order asymptotics of IEh(Sn) for particular classes of functions h. Of special interest are indicator functions h( ) = 1I A , A Z . Denote · {·∈ } ⊂ +

Qλ(A) = IP(πλ A) + IP(πλ +2 A) 2IP(πλ +1 A) 2, h ∈ ∈ − ∈ i. 1/2 ε = min 1;(2π[λ pn∗ ])− +2δ/(1 pn∗ /λ) , pn∗ = max pi. i n n − − o ≤ ⋆ Let πλ denote a random variable with distribution (40). Then Q (A) = [IP(π⋆ A) IP(π +1 A)]/2λ λ λ ∈ − λ ∈ (see [79], ch. 4). The following result from [79], ch. 4, sharpens (13) in [52] and the bound of Corollary 2.4 in [10] (Corollary 9.A.1 in [12]).

Theorem 11 Let X , ..., X be independent Bernoulli r.v.s, (X )= B(p ). Then 1 n L i i n 2 2 IP(Sn A) IP(πλ A)+ Qλ(A) pi 2δ∗ε +2δ , (65) ∈ − ∈ ≤ Xi=1

1 λ n 2 1 λ n 3 where δ = λ− (1 e− ) p , δ∗ = λ− (1 e− ) p . − i=1 i − i=1 i P P S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 22

Recall that λ = n pk (k 2). Denote k i=1 i ≥ P ∆h( )= h( + 1) h( ). · · − · Theorem 12 [22] If IE h(π ) π4 < , then | λ | λ ∞ IEh(S ) IEh(π )+ λ IE∆2h(π )/2 n − λ 2 λ ∗ epn λ IE ∆3h(π ) /3+ λ2IE ∆4h(π ) /8 . (66) ≤ (1 p )2 3 | λ | 2 | λ | − n∗   k k Note that the assumption IE ∆ h(πλ) < is equivalent to IEπλ h(πλ) < (k IN), see Proposition 1 in [22]. Borisov| & Ruzankin| ∞ ([22], Lemma 2) have showe| d| also∞ that∈

2 sup IP(Sn =k)/IP(πλ =k) (1 pn∗ ) . k ≤ −

Asymptotic expansions for IEh(Sn) IEh(πλ), where Xk are non-negative integer- valued random variables and function −h is either bounded{ } or grows at a polynomial rate, are presented in Barbour [10]. Asymptotic expansions for IEh(Sn) IEh(πλ), where h = 1, have been given by Barbour & Jensen [11]. − k k1 Unit measure (signed measure) approximations. A number of authors evaluated the accuracy of unit measure (signed measure) approximation to the distribution of a sum Sn of independent Bernoulli r.v.s (see, e.g., [25, 18, 16]). In particular, Borovkov [25] has generalised inequality (25). Note that asymptotic expansion (65) is an example of a unit measure approximation.

Denote by Pn the distribution corresponding (with some abuse of notation) to πλ+λ2 +

2π λ2/2 (i.e., Pn is a convolution of Π(λ+λ2) and a Poisson unit measure with parameter λ− /2 on 2Z ). In the assumption that θ<1/2 Barbour & Xia ([18], Theorem 4.1) have − 2 + shown that d ( (S ); P ) λ /λ(1 2λ ) λ λ p . T V L n n ≤ 3 − 2 − 2 − n∗ p Cekanaviˇciusˇ & Kruopis [28] present an estimate of the accuracy of unit measure ap- proximation in terms of the Gini-Kantorovich distance:

1 2 dG ( (Sn); Qn) Cλ− λ2(1+(λ/λ2) ), L ≤ ∗ where C is an absolute constant, λ = max 1; λ λ2 and Qn (with some abuse of ∗ { − } notation) corresponds to πλ λ2/2 π λ2/2 ( Qn is a convolution of Π(λ λ2/2) and a − − − − Poisson unit measure with parameter λ2/2 on Z+). Note that k kQn(k) = IESn, 2 − − (k λ) Pn(k) = var Sn. P k − P Barbour & Cekanaviˇciusˇ [16] present a unit measure approximation to the distribution of a sum of independent integer-valued r.v.s. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 23

2.6 Sum of a random number of random variables

Let ν,X,X1,X2, ... be independent non-negative random variables, where r.v. ν takes values in Z+, X,X1,X2, ... are i.i.d. random variables. Set Sν = X1 + ... + Xν . A natural task is to evaluate the accuracy of Poisson approximation to (S ). L ν We consider first the case where X,X1,X2, ... are Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s.

Denoteν ¯ := IEν. Then IESν = pν.¯ Let denote the class of functions h : Z IR such that ∆2h 1, and set F2 + → || ||≤

d2(X; Y ) = sup IEh(X) IEh(Y ) . h 2 | − | ∈F Logunov [67] points out that d (X; Y ) d (X; Y ), and shows that T V ≤ 2 2 d2(Sν; πpν¯) p d (ν; πpν¯), ≤ ∗ where d (X; Y )= k 1 k(k 1) IP(X =k) IP(Y =k) /2. Note that d (X; Y ) dG (X; Y ). ∗ ≥ − | − | ∗ ≥ Yannaros [113]P has shown that

d (π ; π ) min √λ √µ ; λ µ . (67) T V λ µ ≤ {| − | | − |} The first term in (67) has been improved by Roos [92]:

2 √ dT V(πλ; πµ) λ √µ . (67∗) ≤ r e −

Note that the second term in the r.-h.s. of (67) is a consequence of the trivial inequality

d (π ; π ) 1 exp( λ µ ) (67⋆) T V λ µ ≤ − −| − | that follows by defining πλ and πµ on a common probability space (cf. (4.10) in [79]). It is easy to see that

dT V(Sν; πλ) IP(ν =k)dT V(Sk; πλ), ≤ Xk d (S ; π ) d (S ; π )+ d (π ; π ). T V k λ ≤ T V k kp T V kp λ Using these inequalities and (67), Yannaros [113] has shown that

p pν var ν d (S ; π ) min ;(1 IEe− )p + min pIE ν ν¯ ; p . (68) T V ν pν¯ ≤ 2√1 p − | − | r ν¯ n − o n o pν The term min p/2√1 p ;(1 IEe− )p in (68) is inherited from (28) and (29). { − − } S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 24

⋆ The right-hand side of (68) can be sharpened using (32), (67 ) and (67∗):

2 p ν ν¯ dT V(Sν; πpν¯) 3p/4e + 2(δ∗ +δ ) + min 1 IEe− | − | ; IE √ν √ν¯ 2p/e . (69) ≤ n −  | − |p o 1/2 3/2 Note that IE √ν √ν¯ min ν¯− √var ν ;¯ν− var ν . | − | ≤ { } Mixed Poisson distribution. A number of authors (see, e.g., Roos [92]) have eval- uated the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the mixed Poisson distribution, i.e., the distribution of the r.v. π , where (π )= Π(t), r.v. ν takes values in [0; ): ν L t ∞ ∞ IP(πν =m)= IP(πy =m)IP(ν dy) (m 0). Z0 ∈ ≥

d If Xi are Poisson Π(λ) r.v.s, then Sν = πλν is a mixed Poisson random variable. {Denote} by NB(n, p) the negative Binomial distribution: (S )= NB(n, p) if L n i+n 1 IP(S =i)= − (1 p)npi (i 0). n  i  − ≥

The negative Binomial distribution NB(t, p) is a mixed Poisson distribution with

t t 1 yr IP(ν dy)/dy = r y − e− /Γ(t) (y>0), ∈ y 1 x where r =p/(1 p), Γ(y)= ∞ x − e− dx. − 0 Roos [92] presents estimatesR of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the mixed Poisson distribution with a correct constant at the leading term.

Sum of 0-1 random variables till the stopping time. We now consider the situa- tion where r.v. ν depends on X . { i} Let X,X1,X2, ... be i.i.d. non-negative integer-valued r.v.s. Set S0 =0,

S = X + ... + X (n 1), n 1 n ≥ and let µ(t) denote the stopping time:

µ(t) = max n 0 : S t . { ≥ n ≤ } Theorems 13–14 below are cited from see [79], ch. 3. They provide estimates of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of the number

µ(t) N (x)= 1I X x + 1I t S x (70) t { j ≥ } { − µ(t) ≥ } Xj=1 of exceedances of a “high” level x [0; t] till µ(t). ∈ S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 25

Note that N (x)=0 = M line for a series of operations, and the total amount of credit is t units of money. The cost of the i-th operation is denoted by Xi . What is the probability that the bank will ever pay x or more units of money at once? that there will be a certain number of such payments? Information on the asymptotic properties of the distribution of random variables Mt and Nt(x) can help to answer these questions. Let X < , i 1 , X > , j 1 be independent r.v.s with the distributions { i ≥ } { j ≥ } (X < )= (X X )= (X X x). L L | L L | ≥ We set p = IP(X x), x ≥ k m S (k)=0, S (k) = X > + X < (m 1). 0 m i i ≥ Xi=0 i=Xk+1

Let K , K∗ denote the end-points of (X), and set ∗ L τ = τ ′ k , τ ′ = min n : S (k) > t x , k k − k { n − } λ λ (t, x, k)= p (t x kIEX > )/IEX < . k ≡ k x − − In Theorems 13–14 we assume the following condition: there exist constants D< and D (K ; K∗) such that ∞ ∗ ∈ ∗ ∞ IP(X y)dy DIP(X x) (x D ). (72) Zx ≥ ≤ ≥ ≥ ∗ Condition (72) means the tail of (X) is light (cf. (3.15) in [79]). Inequality (72) holds if function g(x)= ecxIP(X x) is notL increasing as x>1/c ( c>0). The equality in (72) ≥ ∃ for all x 0 may be attained only if (X) is exponential with IEX = D. ≥ L Theorem 13 For any k Z , as t , ∈ + →∞ k 1 − sup IP(Nt(x)=k) IP(πλk=k) IP(πλk=r) IP(πλk−1=r) =O(1/t), x B+(t) − − − ∈ Xr=0
where B+(t)=( K ; K∗ t/(k+2)). ∗ ∧ S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 26

Let π(t, x) denote a Poisson r.v. with parameter pxt/IEX.

Theorem 14 For any k Z , as t , ∈ + →∞ 1 sup IP(Nt(x)=k) IP(π(t, x)=k) = O(t− ln t). ∗ K∗

One can show that Nt(x) is “small” when x is “large”:

√t sup IP(Nt(x) 1) q ( q (0; 1)). x √t ≥ ≤ ∃ ∈ ≥

Theorem 3.7 in [79] presents asymptotic expansions for IP(Nx(t)= k). The asymptotic expansions for (M ) are available under a weaker moment assumption (cf. [79], ch. 3). L t The number of intervals between consecutive jumps of a Poisson process. Con- sider a Poisson jump process πλ(s),s 0 with parameter λ > 0, and let ηi denote th { ≥ } the moment of its i jump. Set Xi = ηi ηi 1 . Then Nt(x) is the number of intervals − between consecutive jumps with lengths− greater or equal to x. If the points of jumps represent catastrophic/rare events, then Nt(x) can be interpreted as the number of “long” intervals without catastrophes. λx Let π be a Poisson r.v. with parameter tλe− . Then for any k Z , as t , t,x ∈ + →∞ 1 sup IP(Nt(x)= k) IP(πt,x = k) = O(t− ln t) (73) 0

(cf. (3.12) in [79]).

Open problems. 2.5. Will asymptotic expansions for (N (t)) hold under a weaker moment assumption? L x 2.6. Generalise the results of Theorems 13–14 to the case of

µ(t) N (x)= Y 1I X x + Y 1I t S x , t i { j ≥ } µ(t)+1 { − µ(t) ≥ } Xj=1 where (Xi,Yi)i 1 is a sequence of i.i.d. pairs of r.v.s, Yi >0. { ≥ } 3 Applications

Applications of the theory of Poisson approximation to meteorology, reliability theory and extreme value theory have been discussed in [7, 51, 63, 79]. In this section we present a number of results that are not fully covered in existing surveys. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 27

3.1 Long head runs Let ξ , i 1 be a sequence of 0-1 random variables. { i ≥ } We say a head run (a series of 1’s) starts at i = 1 if ξ1 = 1; a series starts at i> 1 if ξi 1 =0, ξi =1. If ξi 1 =0, ξi =...= ξi+k 1 =1, we say the head run is of length k. − − − ≥ For instance, if n = 5 and ξ1 = ξ2 = ξ3 =1,ξ4 =0,ξ5 =1, there is one series (head run) of length 3 and one series of length 1. Denote A = ξ =...= ξ =1 , A = ξ =0,ξ =...= ξ =1 (i>1). 0 { 1 k } i { i i+1 i+k } Then n k − W (k)= 1I A (n k 1) n { i} ≥ ≥ Xi=0 is the number of head runs of length k among ξ1, ..., ξn (NLHR). Set ≥ L = max k : ξ = ... = ξ =1( i n k) . (74) n { i+1 i+k ∃ ≤ − } Ln is the length of the longest head run (LLHR) among X1, ..., Xn. Obviously, L

Let ξi, i 1 be i.i.d. Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s, p (0;1), and let πλ denote the Poisson Π(λ) r.v..{ Theorem≥ } 7 with B = [i k; i+k] and ∈ i − λ λ(n,k,p)= pk(1+(n k)(1 p)) ≡ − − yields the following

Corollary 15 As n k 1, ≥ ≥ λ k d (W (k); π ) (1 e− )(2k+1)p . (75) T V n λ ≤ − An open question is if estimate (75) can be improved. Note, for instance, that (75) does not yield (77) even for j =0.

There is a close relation between Nt(x) and Wn(k). Let η0 = 0,

ηi = min k >ηi 1 : ξk =0 , Xi = ηi ηi 1 (i 1). { − } − − ≥ Then µ(t) W (k)= 1I X 1 k + 1I n η k . (76) n { j − ≥ } { − µ(n) ≥ } Xj=1 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 28

Hence Wn 1(k)= Nn(k+1). − Denote λ = n(1 p)pk . Theorem 14 entails k − Corollary 16 For any j Z , as n , ∈ + →∞ 1 max IP(Wn(k)= j) IP(πλk = j) = O n− ln n . (77) 1 k n | − | ≤ ≤
1 According to Theorem 3.13 in [79], the rate n− ln n in (77) cannot be improved.

The number of long non-decreasing runs. Let ξ = 1I Y Y , where Y are i { i ≤ i+1} { i} i.i.d.r.v.s with a continuous d.f.. Then NLHR Wn(k) is the number of non-decreasing runs of length k (NLNR), and LLHR is the length of the longest non-decreasing run (LLNR) ≥ + + among Y1, ..., Yn+1. We denote LLNR by Ln and NLNR by Wn (k). The topic concerning LLNR and NLNR has applications in finance. It is well known that prices of shares and financial indexes evolve in cycles of growth and decline. Knowing + + the asymptotics of Ln and Wn (k) can help evaluating the length of the longest period of continuous growth/decline of a particular financial instrument as well as the distribution of the number of such long periods. Pittel [81] has proved a Poisson limit theorem for NLNR (see also Chryssaphinou et al. [33] concerning the case of a Markov chain). We proceed with the case of i.i.d.r.v.s with a continuous d.f.. Note that (ξ )= B(1/2) L i and IP(Y ... Y )=1/(k+1)!. Set λ = IEW +(k). Then 1 ≤ ≤ k+1 n,k n λ =1/(k+1)!+(n k)/k!(k+2). n,k − Theorem 7 with B = [i k 1; i+k+1] yields the following i − − Corollary 17 As n k 1, ≥ ≥ + λ d (W (k); π ) (1 e− n,k )(2k+3)/(k+1)!. T V n λn,k ≤ − The accuracy of compound Poisson approximation to the distribution of the number of non-decreasing runs of fixed length has been evaluated by Barbour & Chryssaphinou [15], p. 982 (continuous d.f.) and Minakov [76] (discrete d.f.). Concerning the asymptotics of LLNR, see [34, 79] and references therein.

Open problem. 3.1. Improve the estimates of Corollary 15 and Corollary 17. 3.1. Derive (45)-type (i.e., uniform in k) estimates of the accuracy of (possibly shifted) Poisson approximation to (W (k)) and (W +(k)). L n L n S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 29

3.2 Long match patterns Closely related to the number of long head runs is the number of long match patterns (NLMP) between sequences of independent r.v.s. Information on the distribution of NLMP and the length of the longest match pattern (LLMP) can help recognising “valuable” fragments of DNA sequences (see [2, 3, 75, 77, 78]). In this section we present results on the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of NLMP. Theorems 18, 20 and Lemma 22 below have been established by the author (see [79], ch. 4). Let X,X1, ..., Xm ,Y,Y1, ..., Yn be independent non-degenerate random variables taking values in a discrete state space A. Denote (k IN) ∈ T = 1I X =Y ,...,X =Y , ij { i+1 j+1 i+k j+k} T˜ = T (k)1I X =Y , ij ij { i 6 j} T ∗ = T˜ (i 1, j 1), T ∗ = T (i=0 or j =0). ij ij ≥ ≥ ij ij Then

Mm,n∗ = max k min(m, n) : max Tij =1 ≤ (i,j) J n ∈ o is the length of the longest match pattern between (X1 ...Xm) and (Y1 ...Yn). LLMP M ∗ is a 2–dimensional analog of LLHR L . If A = 0, 1 and Y = ... = m,n n { } 1 Yn =1, then Mn,n∗ = Ln. Given m k, n k, let ≥ ≥ J J(k, m, n)= (i, j):0 i m k, 0 j n k . ≡ { ≤ ≤ − ≤ ≤ − } Denote by W W (k)= T ∗ m,n ≡ m,n ij (i,jX) J ∈ the number of long match patterns (patterns of length k). Then ≥ M ∗

In the rest of this section we assume that r.v.s X,X1, ..., Xm ,Y,Y1, ..., Yn are identically distributed. We set

λ λ = IEW , m′ = m k +1, n′ = n k+1. ≡ k,m,n m,n − − k k Then λ =(m′ 1)(n′ 1)(1 p)p +(m′ +n′ 1)p . Denote − − − − k+1 p = IP(X =Y ), pj = IP(X =j), qk = pj , q = q2, Xj A ∈ and let p = max pj, c+ = log(1/q) 1, c = log(1/p ), ∗ j A ∗ ∗ ∈ − S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 30 where log is to the base 1/p. Note that

p2

1 c+ c >1/2. (79) ≥ ≥ ∗

Note that c+ = c = 1 if (X) is uniform over a finite alphabet. ∗ L Let πm,n denote a Poisson random variable with parameter λk,m,n. The following theorem shows that the distribution of the number of long match patterns can be well approximated by the Poisson law.

Theorem 18 If n k and m k 1, then ≥ ≥ ≥ λ 1 e− 2k k d (W ; π ) − m′n′(2k+1) 2kq +(m′ +n′ 1)(p +q ) . (80) T V m,n m,n ≤ λ 2k −
Theorem 18 has been derived using Theorem 7 and Lemma 22. Denote ∆ (k)= IP(M ∗

c+ 1+c+ 1 2c∗ 1+2c∗ max ∆m,n(k)= O (m+n)(mn)− (ln mn) +(mn) − (ln mn) . (82) 1 k m n ≤ ≤ ∧   It is easy to see that the accuracy of estimate (81) depends on the relation between m and n. If (X) is uniform over a finite alphabet and (ln mn)/(m n) 0, then Corollary 19 impliesL that ∧ → λ 1 2 max IP(Mm,n∗ 0, then the right-hand side of (81) becomes O(n− ln n). We conject 1 that the correct rate of convergence in (83) for the uniform (X) is O (n− ln n). L λ The reason why (80) does not yield such a rate is the lack of factor e− on the right- hand side. Results obtained for LLHR by the method of recurrent inequalities do produce such a factor (cf. Theorem 3.12 in [79]). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 31

In a more general situation one can consider NLMP with say r mismatches allowed. An estimate of the accuracy of Poisson approximation to the distribution of the number of long r-interrupted match patterns among X1, ..., Xm,Y1, ..., Yn (match patterns of length k with r “interruptions”) can be found in [75, 79]. Neuhauser [78] considers a situation≥ ≤ where (X) may differ from (Y ) and only insertions and deletions (but no mismatches) are allowedL to occur; she presentsL a logarithmic estimate of the rate of Poisson approxima- tion to the distribution of the number of such long patterns.

The Zubkov–Mihailov statistic. Let now Y = X ( i), m = n. Denote i i ∀

N ∗ N ∗(k)= T ∗ , n ≡ n ij (i,j)XA(n,k) ∈ where A(n, k)= (i, j):0 ik). { ≤ ≤ − } Nn∗ is the number of long match patterns in one and the same sequence, X1, ..., Xn. Statistic N ∗ was introduced by Zubkov & Mihailov [119] who have shown that (N ∗) n L n is asymptotically Poisson Π(µ) if

n2pk(1 p)/2 µ>0, nktpk 0 ( t>0). − → ∗ → ∀ Note that

Mn∗ = max k n: max Tij =1 { ≤ (i,j) A(n,k) } ∈ is the length of the longest match pattern among X1, ..., Xn. Obviously,

M ∗ 3k 3, then ≥ λ∗ 1 e− 3 2k k 2 k d (N ∗; π∗ ) − (n∗) (2k+1)(p +q )+2(kn∗) q +2kn∗p , T V n n,k ≤ λ 2k ∗
k where λ∗ λ∗ =(n 3k+1) p (1+(n 3k)(1 p)/2), n∗ = n k, (π∗ )= Π(λ∗). ≡ n,k − − − − L n,k Theorem 20 has been derived using Theorem 7 and Lemma 22. Denote ∆∗(n, k)= IP(M ∗

1 If (X) is uniform over a finite alphabet, then the right-hand side of (84) is O(n− ln n), L 1 2 the right-hand side of (85) is O(n− (ln n) ).

The key result behind Theorems 18 and 20 is the following

Lemma 22 For all natural i, j, i′, j′ such that (i, j) =(i′, j′) , 6

IP(T ∗ = T ∗′ ′ = 1) q . (86) ij i j ≤ 2k

Denote by τ = min n: N ∗(k) =0 k { n 6 } the first instance a match pattern of length k appears in the sequence X , i 1 . Then { i ≥ }

τ > n = M ∗

The results on the asymptotics of τk can be derived from the corresponding results on Mn∗ .

NLMP with a small number of mismatches has been considered by several authors (see [75, 79] and references therein). A number of authors evaluated the accuracy of compound Poisson approximations to the distribution of NLMP (see [75, 79, 98] and references therein).

Open problems. 3.2. Derive uniform in k estimates of (possibly shifted) Poisson approximation to (W ) L m,n and (Nn∗). L nd 3.3. Find the 2 -order asymptotic expansions for IP(Wm,n ) and IP(Nn∗ ). 3.4. Check if the correct rate of convergence in (82) and (85)∈· in the case of∈· uniform (X) 1 L is O (n− ln n). 3.5. Improve the estimate of the rate of convergence in the limit theorem for the length of the longest r-interrupted match pattern.

4 Compound Poisson approximation

The topic of compound Poisson (CP) approximation is vast. From a theoretical point of view, the interest to the topic arises in connection with Kolmogorov’s problem concerning the accuracy of approximation of the distribution of a sum of independent r.v.s by infinitely divisible laws (see [5, 65, 82, 84] and references therein). Recall that the class of infinitely divisible distributions coincides with the class of weak limits of compound Poisson distributions [58]. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 33

The topic has applications in extreme value theory, insurance, reliability theory, pat- terns matching, etc. (cf. [7, 12, 15, 63, 79]). For instance, in (re)insurance applications the sum S = n Y 1I Y >x of integer-valued r.v.s allows to account for the total loss n i=1 i { i i} from the claimsP Yi that exceed excesses xi . If the probabilities IP(Yi >xi) are small, { } { } (Sn) can be accurately approximated by a Poisson or a compound Poisson law. L In extreme value theory one deals with the number of extreme (rare) events represented by a sum of 0-1 r.v.s (indicators of rare events). The indicators can be dependent. A well- known approach consists of grouping observations into blocks which can be considered almost independent [20]. The number of r.v.s in a block is an integer-valued r.v., hence the number of rare events is a sum of almost independent integer-valued r.v.s. In all such situations the block sums are non-zero with small probabilities. More information concerning applications can be found in [7, 12, 45, 63]. This section concentrates on results concerning compound Poisson (CP) approximation that can be derived from the results concerning pure Poisson approximation.

4.1 CP limit theorem Compound Poisson (CP) distribution is the distribution of a r.v.

πλ

ζi , Xi=1

d where ζ0 =0, r.v.s πλ,ζ,ζ1,ζ2, ... are independent, (ζ)= Π(λ), ζi = ζ (i 1). πλ L ≥ We denote ( ζ ) by Π(λ,ζ) Π(λ, (ζ)). L i=1 i ≡ L Typically ζ =0Pw.p. 1. The requirement ζ =0 w.p. 1 may be omitted. Indeed, denote 6 6 p = IP(ζ =0). Then by Khintchin’s formula ([58], ch. 2), 6 d ζ = τpζ′, (87) where τ and ζ′ are independent r.v.s, (ζ′)= (ζ ζ =0), (τ )= B(p). Note that p L L | 6 L p

Π(t, τpζ′)= Π(tp,ζ′)

(cf. (6.26) in [79]). Let Xn,1, ..., Xn,n n 1 be a triangle array of stationary dependent 0-1random variables, ≥ i.e., sequence{ X , ...,} X is stationary for each n IN. Set n,1 n,n ∈

Sn = Xn,1 + ... + Xn,n.

Let ζr,n be a r.v. with distribution (8). The following Theorem 23 generalises Theorem 3 to the case of CP approximation. It states that under certain assumptions weak convergence of the cluster size distribution (see (89) below) is necessary and sufficient for the CP limit theorem for Sn . S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 34

In Theorem 23 below we will assume (11) and the following condition:

lim sup nIP(Xn,1 = 0) < . (88) n 6 ∞ →∞

Note that relation (11) does not imply (88) — for example, consider the case Xn,1 X. Denzel & O’Brien [41] present an example of an α–mixing sequence such that (11) holds≡ though (88) does not.

Theorem 23 Assume conditions (11), (88) and ∆. If

ζ ζ (n ) (89) r,n ⇒ →∞ for a sequence r =rn , then { }∈R π(λ) S ζ . (90) n ⇒ i Xi=0 The limit in (90) does not depend on the choice of a sequence r . { n}∈R If Sn converges weakly to a random variable Y, then (Y ) is compound Poisson Π(λ,ζ), where λ = ln IP(Y =0). If λ> 0, then (89) holds forL some random variable ζ and sequence r =r − . { n}∈R Theorem 23 is effectively Theorem 5.1 from [79].

4.2 Accuracy of CP approximation Let X be independent r.v.s that are non-zero with small probabilities (cf. [65, 70, 83, { i} 115]). Set Sn := X1 + ... + Xn, and denote

p = IP(X =0) (i 1). i i 6 ≥ According to Khintchin’s formula (87),

d Xi = τiXi′, (87∗) where τ and X′ are independent r.v.s, (X′)= (X X =0), (τ )= B(p ). Hence i i L i L i| i 6 L i i d Sn = τ1X1′ + ... + τnXn′ .

Let ζ1, ..., ζn be independent compound Poisson Π(pi,Xi′) random variables. Set Zn = n i=1 ζi. Note that Zn is a compound Poisson random variable: P (Z )= Π(λ,X′ ), L n η where r.v. η is independent of X′ , ..., X′ , IP(η =j)= p /λ (1 j n). 1 n j ≤ ≤ S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 35

A simple estimate of the accuracy of CP approximation to (S ) follows from the L n property of dT V and (26):

n n d (S ; Z ) d (τ ; π ) p2 T V n n ≤ T V i pi ≤ i Xi=1 Xi=1 (see LeCam [65], Theorem 1). Zaitsev [115] has derived an estimate of the accuracy of compound Poisson approxima- tion that can be sharper than (25∗) if λ = p1 + ... + pn is “large”. The following Theorem 24 presents Zaitsev’s result.

Theorem 24 There exists an absolute constant C such that

d (S ; Z ) Cp∗ . (91) K n n ≤ n Inequality (91) has been generalised to the multidimensional situation by Zaitsev [116].

We consider now the situation where

d X′ = X′ ( i). i ∀ In such a situation an estimate of the accuracy of compound Poisson approximation to (S ) follows from the estimate of the accuracy of pure Poisson approximation to (τ + L n L 1 ...+τn). Indeed, denote πλ

νn = τ1 + ... + τn,Y = Xi′, Xi=1 where Poisson Π(λ) r.v. πλ is independent of X1′ ,X2′ , .... Then

νn d Sn = Xi′. (92) Xi=1 It is easy to check (see, e.g., Presman [83]) that

νn πλ d (S ; Y ) d X′; X′ d (ν ; π ). (93) T V n ≡ T V i i ≤ T V n λ  Xi=1 Xi=1  Kolmogorov ([59], formula (30)) has applied (93) without formulating it explicitly. Presman [83] was probably the first to formulate (93) explicitly and present its proof.

Presman [83] has evaluated dT V(νn; πλ) (and hence dT V(Sn; Y )) using (93) and (30). Michel [70] has applied (93) and the Barbour–Eagleson estimate (29). An application of (93) and (32) yields 2 d (S ; Y ) 3θ/4e +2δ∗ε +2δ . (94) T V n ≤ S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 36

According to [79], Lemma 5.4,

d (S ; Y ) d (ν; π )IE X′ . (95) G n ≤ G λ | | A combination of (36) and (95) entails

4 ′ dG (Sn; Y ) 1 3 2/enp λ2IE X . (96) ≤  ∧ p  | |

Further results on the accuracy of compound Poisson approximation can be found in [14, 30, 31, 91, 118, 112].

Open problem. 4.1 Evaluate constant C in (91).

4.3 CP approximation to B(n,p) Below we present an estimate of the accuracy of compound Poisson approximation to the Binomial law related to the topic of pure Poisson approximation. Let X,X1, ... be independent Bernoulli B(p) r.v.s. Presman [82] has shown that

2/3 sup dT V(B(n, p); Fn,p)= O(n− ), (97) p where the compound Poisson distribution Fn,p is constructed via Poisson distributions (a similar result in terms of dK is due to Meshalkin [72]). We present Presman’s result in Theorem 25 below (see also [5], ch. 4).

Denote by x the integer number that is the nearest to x from above, and let ⌈ ⌉ γ = 3np2 2np3 , β = γ 3np2 +2np3 [0; 1), q =1 p. − − ∈ −   Let η1, η2, η3 be independent r.v.s with distributions

(η )= Π(pq2 β/n), (η )= Π(p2q+β/3n), (η )= Π(β/6n). L 1 − L 2 L 3 Set Y := γ/n+η η +2η . 1 − 2 3 Note that Y is a CP r.v.. One can check that

IEY = p, IE(Y p)2 = pq, IE(Y p)3 = pq(q p). − − − Let F := (Y + ... + Y ), where Y are independent copies of Y . n,p L 1 n { i} S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 37

Theorem 25 There exists an absolute constant C such that

d (B(n, p); F ) Cε (0 p 1/2), (98) T V n,p ≤ n,p ≤ ≤ where ε = min np2; p; max 1/(np)2;1/n . n,p { { }} 2/3 Bound (97) follows after noticing that sup0 p 1/2 εn,p = O(n− ). ≤ ≤

Dependent 0-1 r.v.s. Let X,X1, ... be a stationary sequence of 0-1r.v.s. The following Theorem 26 is an application of (93) in the case of dependent r.v.s. (r) (r) Let π,ζ1 ,ζ2 ,... be independent random variables, where 1 r n, πn,r is a Poisson (r) ≤ ≤ Π(kq) r.v., ζ0 =0,

(ζ(r)) = (S S >0) (i 1), L i L r| r ≥ q = IP(S =0), k = [n/r]. r 6 Denote p = IP(X =1), πn,r (r) Yn = ζi . Xi=0 The distribution of S = X + ... + X can be approximated by a CP distribution (Y ). n 1 n L n Theorem 26 If n>r>l 0, then ≥ 1 d (S ; Y ) κ rp + (2kl + r′)p + nr− γ (l), (99) T V n n ≤ n,r n 4 ′ dG (Sn; Yn) rp min np ; 3 2np/e + (2kl + r )p + nγn(l), (100) ≤ n p o np np where r′ =n rk, κ = min 1 e− ;3/4e+(1 e− )rp and γ (l) = min 4α(l)√r ; β (l) . − n,r { − − } n { n } Theorem 26 is effectively Theorem 5.2 from [79]. If the random variables Xi are independent, then (99) with r =1, l = 0 yields (29) and (32). { } If the random variables X are m–dependent, then one can choose l = m, r = { i} √mn , the smallest integer greater than or equal to √mn , and get the estimate dT V(Sn; Yn) 4⌈p √mn⌉ . ≤ ⌈ ⌉ Further reading on the topic of the accuracy of compound Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of dependent r.v.s includes [88, 32] and references therein.

Open problem. 4.2. Evaluate constant C in (98). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 38

5 Poisson process approximation

The topic of point process approximation is vast; an interested reader is referred to [36, 69]. This section concentrates on the results concerning Poisson process approximation that are closely related to the results on Poisson approximation to the distribution of a sum of 0-1 random variables.

Point process counting locations of rare events. Let ξ , i 1 be Bernoulli r.v.s { i ≥ } (e.g., ξ = 1I X >u , where u is a “high” level). Then i { i n} n n S ( )= 1I i/n ξ (101) n · { ∈·} i Xi=1 can be called a “Bernoulli process”. S ( ) counts locations of extreme/rare events represented by r.v.s ξ . A typical n · { i} example of a rare event is an exceedance of a high threshold. For instance, let X,X1,X2, ... be a stationary sequence of random variables, and let u be a sequence of levels. Set ξ = 1I X >u . Then S ( )= N ( ,u ), where { n} i { i n} n · n · n n

N (B,u )= 1I i/n B,X >u (B (0; 1]). (101∗) n n { ∈ i n} ⊂ Xi=1 Process N ( ,u ) counts locations of exceedances of level u . n · n n Let r = rn be a sequence obeying (7). We denote by ζr,n a r.v. with distribution (8). { }

Theorem 27 Assume (11), (88) and mixing condition ∆. If (10) holds, then

N ( ,u ) N( ), (102) n · n ⇒ · where N( ) is a Poisson point process with intensity rate λ. · Theorem 27 is a particular case of Theorem 7.2 in [79]. The necessity part of Theorem 27 is given by Theorem 3: if (102) holds, then so does (10). Leadbetter et al. [63], Theorem 5.2.1, present a version of Theorem 27 with condition (D′) instead of (10).

Denote by Ξn a Poisson point process with intensity measure

n λ( )= p 1I i/n , · i { ∈·} Xi=1 where pi = IP(ξi =1). S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 39

The accuracy of Poisson process approximation to (S ( )) has been evaluated by L n · Brown [26] and Kabanov et al. [54], Theorem 3.2: if ξ are independent, then { i} n 2 d (S ( );Ξ ( )) p . (25′′) T V n · n · ≤ i Xi=1

Arratia et al. [2] have generalised (25′′) to the case of dependent Bernoulli r.v.s. Ruzankin [94] and Xia [111] present estimates of the accuracy of Poisson process ap- proximation in terms of a dG -type distance. In the general case (when the limiting distribution of ζr,n is not degenerate) the lim- iting distribution of Nn( ,un) is necessarily compound Poisson (Hsing et al. [53], see also [79], ch. 7). ·

Excess process. Let X,X1,X2, ... be a stationary sequence of r.v.s. If one is interested in the joint distribution of exceedances of several levels among ε X1, ..., Xn, a natural tool is the excess process Nn( ). We give the definition of the excess process below. · Suppose there is a sequence u ( ), n 1 of functions on [0; ) such that function { n · ≥ } ∞ u ( ) is strictly decreasing for all large enough n, u (0) = , n · n ∞

lim sup nIP(X>un(t)) < (0u (t) , n { i n } Xi=1 ε where t>0. Given B [0; ), we call Nn(t), t B the excess process. ε ⊂ ∞ { ∈ } Process Nn( ) describes variability in the heights of the extremes. ·ε 1 Note that N ( ) is the “tail empirical process” for Y , ..., Y , where Y =u− (X ): n · n,1 n,n n,i n i n N ε(t)= 1I Y

First, we recall the definitions of mixing (weak dependence) conditions. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 40

Given 0u (t ) , l i m, 1 j k; Fl,m { i n j } ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ mixing (weak dependence) coefficient αn(ln) := α (ln,un(τ)) is defined as above.

Condition ∆( u (τ) ) is said to hold if α (l ) 0 for some sequence l such that { n } n n → { n} l , l /n 0 as n . n →∞ n → →∞

Condition ∆∗ holds if ∆( u (τ) ) is in force ( 0

The next condition describes the joint distribution of exceedances of several levels.

We say that condition C′ holds if there exists a sequence r (τ) such that for τ { n} ∈ R every 1 i0, Nr[un(ti); un(tj))>0) = o(r/n).

Condition C′ holds if C′ is valid for all 0

Theorem 28 Assume mixing condition condition ∆, and let π( ) denote a Poisson pro- cess with intensity rate 1. Then · N ε( ) π( ) (106) n · ⇒ · if and only if condition C′ holds.

Example 5.1. Let X,X1,X2, ... be i.i.d.r.v.s with the distribution function (d.f.) F . Denote K∗ = sup x: F (x)<1 , and assume that { } IP(X x)/IP(X >x) 1 (G) ≥ → 1 as x K∗ (Gnedenko’s condition [48]). Set u (t)= F − (t/n), where → n c F ( ) := IP(X> ). c · · ε Then excess process Nn( ), t [0; 1] converges weakly to a pure Poisson process N with intensity rate 1. Process{ N· admits∈ } the representation

π(1) N =d γ ( ), j · Xj=1 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 41 where γ (t) =d 1I ξ 0, let π(np) denote a Poisson Π(np) r.v., where p = IP(X>un(T )). Let η, η1, η2, ... be independent of π(np) i.i.d. processes with the distribution (η( )) = (1I X>u ( ) X>u (T )) (1I Y < Y

1/2 np where ε = min 1;(2π[(n 1)p])− + 2(1 e− )p/(1 1/n) ([79], Theorem 8.3). { − − − } Note that π(np) η ( ) is a Poisson process. If F is a continuous decreasing function, i=1 i · c then η( ) =d 1I Pξ< , where (ξ)= U[0; 1]. · { ·} L

Let X,X1,X2, ... be i.i.d.r.v.s, and let B [0; ) be a closed set. According to (6.5) ⊂ ∞ n in [38] and (49), the total variation distance between 1I Y < t , t B and the { i=1 { n,i } ∈ } approximating Poisson process coincides with dT V(B(p);PΠ(p)), where p = IP(Yn,1 B). In a general situation excess process N ε( ) may converge weakly to a process∈ of more { n · } complex structure: π(T ) N ε(t), t T γ (t/T ), t T , (108) { n ≤ }⇒  j ≤  Xj=1 where π(T ) is Poisson Π(T ), γj( ) are independent jump processes. π(T ) { · } Process j=1 γj(t) can be called Poisson cluster process or compound Poisson process of then P second ordero (regarding the standard CP process as a “compound Poisson process of the first order”). Necessary and sufficient conditions for the weak convergence of the excess process to a compound Poisson process or a Poisson cluster processes are presented in [79], ch. 7, ε 8. For an estimate of the total variation distance between Nn( ) and the approximating process in the case of weakly dependent r.v.s see [79], Theorem· 8.3.

General point process of exceedances. Consider now a two–dimensional point process Nn∗ that counts locations of rare events (e.g., exceedances of “high” thresholds) as well as their “heights”: for any Borel set A (0; 1] [0; ) we set ⊂ × ∞ n 1 N ∗(A) := 1I i/n, u− (X ) A . (109) n { n i ∈ } Xi=1
S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 42

If X are i.d.d.r.v.s, or if X , i 1 is a strictly stationary sequence obeying certain { i} { i ≥ } mixing conditions, then Nn∗( ) converges weakly to a pure Poisson point process (Adler [1]). Theorem 29 below presents· Adler’s result. We will need a multilevel version of the “declustering” condition (D′):

r

lim n IP(Xi+1 >un(t),X1 >un(t))=0 (D+′ ) n →∞ Xi=1 for any sequence r =r (t), 0

Theorem 29 If conditions ∆ and (D+′ ) hold, then Nn∗ converges weakly to a pure Poisson point process N ∗ on (0; 1] [0; ) with the Lebesgue intensity measure. × ∞

Example 5.2. Let Y,Y1,Y2, ... be a sequence of i.i.d.r.v.s with exponential E(1) distribu- tion, and set Xi = Yi + Yi+1 .

Evidently, Xi, i 1 is a stationary sequence of 1–dependent r.v.s. { ≥ } 1 Let u u (t) = ln[t− n ln n], t> 0. Then IP(X>u (t)) t/n, and condition (D′ ) ≡ n n ∼ + holds. According to Theorem 29, Nn∗ N ∗, the Poisson point process with the Lebesgue intensity measure (cf. [79], ch. 7). ⇒ ✷

Adler’s result has been generalised to the case of compound Poisson approximation: necessary and sufficient conditions for the weak convergence of Nn∗ to a compound Poisson point process can be found in [79], ch. 7. Necessary and sufficient conditions for the weak convergence of Nn∗ to a Poisson cluster process are given in [79], ch. 8. π(T ) An estimate of the accuracy of approximation N ∗( ) γ ( ) in terms of the n · ≈ j=1 j · dG (X; Y )-type distance is given in [17]. P

Open problem. 5.1. Improve the estimate of the accuracy of approximation N ∗ N ∗ presented in [17]. n ≈

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful to P.S.Ruzankin and the referee for helpful remarks. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 43

References

[1] Adler R.J. (1978) Weak convergence results for extremal processes generated by dependent random variables. — Ann. Probab., v. 6, No 4, 660–667. [2] Arratia R., Goldstein L. and Gordon L. (1989) Two moments suffice for Poisson approxima- tion. — Ann. Probab., v. 17, No 1, p. 9–25. [3] Arratia R., Gordon L. and Waterman M.S. (1990) The Erd¨os–R´enyi law in distribution, for coin tossing and sequence matching. — Ann. Statist., v. 18, No 2, p. 539–570. [4] Arak T.V. (1981) On the convergence rate in Kolmogorov’s uniform limit theorem. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 26, 219–239, 437–451. [5] Arak T.V. and Zaitsev A.Yu. (1984) Uniform limit theorems for sums of independent random variables. — Proc. Steklov Inst. Math., v. 174, 3–214. [6] Arenbaev N.K. (1976) Asymptotic behavior of the multinomial distribution. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 21, 805–810. [7] Balakrishnan N., Koutras M.V. (2001) Runs and scans with applications. New York: Wiley.

[8] Banis R. (1985) A Poisson limit theorem for rare events of a discrete random field. — Litovsk. Mat. Sb., v. 25, No 1, 3–8. [9] Barbour A.D. and Eagleson G.K. (1983) Poisson approximation for some statistics based on exchangeable trials. — Adv. Appl. Probab., v. 15, No 3, 585–600. [10] Barbour A.D. (1987) Asymptotic expansions in the Poisson limit theorem. — Ann. Probab., v. 15, No 2, 748–766. [11] Barbour A.D. and Jensen J.L. (1989) Local and tail approximations near the Poisson limit. — Scand. J. Statist., v. 16, 75–87. [12] Barbour A.D., Holst L. and Janson S. (1992) Poisson Approximation. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [13] Barbour A.D., Chen L.H.Y., Choi K.P. (1995) Poisson approximation for unbounded func- tions: independent summands. Statistica Sinica, v. 5, No 2, 749–766. [14] Barbour A.D. and Utev S.A. (1999) Compound Poisson approximation in total variation. — Stochastic Process. Appl., v. 82, 89–125. [15] Barbour A.D., Chryssaphinou O. (2001) Ann. Appl. Probab., v. 11, No. 3, 964–1002. [16] Barbour A.D. and Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. (2002) Total variation asymptotics for sums of indepen- dent integer random variables. — Ann. Probab., v. 30, No 2, 509–545. [17] Barbour A.D., Novak S.Y. and Xia A. (2002) Compound Poisson approximation for the distribution of extremes. — Adv. Appl. Probab., v. 34, No 1, 223-240. [18] Barbour A.D. and Xia A. (1999) Poisson perturbations. — ESAIM Probab. Statist., v. 3, 131–150. [19] Barbour A.D. and Xia A. (2006) On Stein’s factors for Poisson approximation in Wasserstein distance. — Bernoulli, v. 6, 943–954. [20] Bernstein S.N. (1926) Sur l’extensiori du theoreme limite du calcul des probabilites aux sommes de quantites dependantes. – Math. Annalen, v. 97, 1–59. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 44

[21] Bernstein S.N. (1946) Probability Theory. — Moscow: Nauka. [22] Borisov I.S. and Ruzankin P.S. (2002) Poisson approximation for expectations of unbounded functions of independent random variables. — Ann. Probab., v. 30, No 4, 1657–1680. [23] Borisov I.S. (2003) A remark on a theorem of Dobrushin and couplings in the Poisson approximation in Abelian groups. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 48, No 3, 521–528. [24] Borisov I.S. and Vorozheikin I.S. (2008) Accuracy of approximation in the Poisson theorem in terms of χ2 distance. — Sibir. Math. J., v. 49, No 1, 5–17. [25] Borovkov K. A. (1988) On the problem of improving Poisson approximation. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 33, No 2, 343–347. [26] Brown T.C. (1983) Some Poisson approximations using compensators. — Ann. Probab. 11, 726–744. [27] Chen L.H.Y. (1975) Poisson approximation for dependent trials. — Ann. Probab., v. 3, 534–545. [28] Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. and Kruopis J. (2000) Signed Poisson approximation: a possible alternative to normal and Poisson laws. — Bernoulli, v. 6, No 4, 591–606. [29] Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. and Vaitkus P. (2001) A centered Poisson approximation via Stein’s method. — Lithuanian Math. J., v. 41, No 4, 319–329. [30] Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. and Wang Y.H. (2003) Compound Poisson approximation for sums of dis- crete nonlattice random variables. — Adv. Appl. Probab., v. 35, 228-250. [31] Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. and Roos B. (2006) An expansion in the exponent for compound binomial approximations. — Liet. Matem. Rink., v. 46, 67–110. [32] Cekanaviˇciusˇ V. and Vellaisamy P. (2010) Compound Poisson and signed compound Poisson approximations to the Markov binomial law. — Bernoulli, v. 16, No 4, 1114–1136. [33] Chryssaphinou O., Papastavridis S., Vaggelatou E. (2001) Poisson approximation for the nonoverlapping appearances of several words in Markov chains. — Combinator. Probab. Computing, v. 10, no. 4, 293–308. [34] Csaki E., F¨oldes A. (1996) On the length of the longest monotone block. — Studia Scien- tiarum Mathematicarum Hungarica, v. 31, 35–46. [35] Dabrowski A., Ivanoff G., Kulik R. (2009) Some notes on Poisson limits for empirical point processes. — Canadian J. Statist., v. 37, 347–360. [36] Daley D.J. and Vere-Jones D. (2008) An introduction to the theory of point processes, v. II. General Theory and Structure. — New York: Springer. [37] Deheuvels P. and Pfeifer D. (1986) A semigroup approach to Poisson approximation. — Ann. Probab., v. 14, No 2, 663–676. [38] Deheuvels P. and Pfeifer D. (1988) Poisson approximation of distributions and point pro- cesses. — J. Multivar. Anal., v. 25, 65–89. [39] Deheuvels P. and Pfeifer D. (1988) On a relationship between Uspenskys theorem and Poisson approximation. — Ann. Inst. Statist. Math., v. 40, 671–681. [40] Deheuvels P., Pfeifer D., Puri M.L. (1989) A new semigroup technique in Poisson approxi- mation. — Semigroup Forum, v. 38, 189–201. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 45

[41] Denzel G.E. and O’Brien G.L. (1975) Limit theorems for extreme values of chain–dependent processes. — Ann. Probab., v. 3, No 5, 773–779. [42] Dobrushin R. L. (1970) Prescribing a system of random variables by conditional distributions. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 15, No 3, 458–486. [43] Franken P. (1964) Approximation der verteilungen von summen unabh¨angiger nichtnegativer ganzzahliger zufallsgr¨ossen durch Poissonsche verteilunged. — Mathematische Nachrichten, v. 27, 303–340. [44] Galambos J. (1987) The asymptotic theory of extreme order statistics. — Melbourne: R.E.Krieger Publishing Co.. [45] Gerber H.U. (1979). An introduction to mathematical risk theory. — Philadelphia: Huebner Foundation. [46] Gini C. (1914) Di un misura delle relazioni tra le graduatorie di due caratteri. — In: Ap- pendix to Hancini A. Le Elezioni Generali Politiche del 1913 nel Comune di Roma. Rome: Ludovico Cecehini. [47] Gnedenko B.V. (1938) Uber die konvergenz der verteilungsgesetze von summen voneinander unabhangiger summanden. — C.R. Acad. Sci. URSS, v. 18, 231–234. [48] Gnedenko B.V. (1943) Sur la distribution du terme maximum d’une s´erie al´eatoire. — Ann. Math., v. 44, 423–453. [49] Gnedenko B.V., Kolmogorov A.N. (1954) Limit distributions for sums of independent random variables. Addison-Wesley: Cambridge, MA. [50] Harremo¨es P. and Ruzankin P.S. (2004) Rate of convergence to Poisson law in terms of information divergence. — IEEE Trans. Inform Theory, v. 50, No 9, 2145–2149. [51] Haight F.A. (1967) Handbook of the Poisson distribution. New York: Wiley. [52] Herrmann H. (1965) Variationsabstand zwischen der Verteilung einer Summe unabh¨angiger nichtnegativer ganzzahliger Zufallsgr¨ossen und Poissonschen Verteilungen. — Mathematische Nachrichten, v. 29, No 5, 265–289. [53] Hsing T., H¨usler J. and Leadbetter M.R. (1988) On the exceedance point process for sta- tionary sequence. — Probab. Theory Rel. Fields, v. 78, 97–112. [54] Kabanov Yu.M., Liptser R.Sh. and Shiryaev A.N. (1983) Weak and strong convergence of the distributions of point processes. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 28, No 2, 288–319. [55] Kabanov Yu.M., Liptser R.Sh. (1983) On convergence in variation of the distributions of multivariate point processes. Z. Wahrscheinlichkeitstheor. verw. Geb., v. 63, 475–485. [56] Kantorovich L.V. (1942) On the translocation of mass. — Doklady USSR Acad. Sci., v. 37, No 7-8, 227–229. Trans: Management Sci. (1958) v. 5, No 1, 1–4. [57] Kerstan J. (1964) Verallgemeinerung eines satzes von Prochorow und Le Cam. — Z. Wahrsch. Verw. Gebiete, v. 2, 173–179. [58] Khintchin A.Y. (1933) Asymptotische Gesetze der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. — Berlin: Springer. [59] Kolmogorov A.N. (1956) Two uniform limit theorems for sums of independent random vari- ables. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 1, No 4, 384–394. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 46

[60] Kontoyiannis I., Harremoes P. and Johnson O.T. (2005) Entropy and the law of small num- bers. — IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, v. 51, No 2, 466–472. [61] Kozulyaev P.A. (1939) Asymptotic analysis of a fundamental formula of Probability Theory. — Acad. Notes Moscow Univ., v. 15, 179–182. [62] Kruopis J. (1986) Precision of approximations of the generalized binomial distribution by convolutions of Poisson measures. — Lithuanian Math. J., v. 26, 37–49. [63] Leadbetter M.R., Lindgren G. and Rootzen H. (1983) Extremes and Related Properties of Random Sequences and Processes. — New York: Springer Verlag. [64] LeCam L. (1960) An approximation theorem for the Poison binomial distribution. Pacif. J. Math., v. 19, 3, p. 1181–1197. [65] LeCam L. (1965) On the distribution of sums of independent random variables. — In: Proc. Intern. Res. Sem. Statist. Lab. Univ. California, pp. 179–202. New York: Springer. [66] Liapunov A.M. (1901) Nouvelle forme du theor‘eme sur la limite des probabilites. — Mem. Acad. Imp. Sci. St.–Peterburg, v. 12, 1–24. [67] Logunov P.L. (1990) Estimates for the convergence rate to the Poisson distribution for ran- dom sums of independent indicators. — Theory Prob. Appl., 35, 587–590. [68] Loynes R.M. (1965) Extreme values in uniformly mixing stationary stochastic processes. — Ann. Math. Statist., v. 36, 993–999. [69] Matthes K., Kerstan J. and Mecke J. (1978) Infinitely divisible point processes. — New York: Wiley. [70] Michel R. (1987) An improved error bound for the compound Poisson approximation of a nearly homogeneous portfolio. — ASTIN Bulletin, v. 17, 165–169. [71] Marcinkiewicz J. (1938) Sur les fonctions independantes II. — Func. Mat., v. 30, 349–364. [72] Meshalkin L.D. (1960) On the approximation of polynomial distributions by infinitely- divisible laws. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 5, No 1, 114–124. [73] Michel R. (1987) An improved error bound for the compound Poisson approximation of a nearly homogeneous portfolio. — ASTIN Bulletin, v. 17, 165–169. [74] Mihailov V.G. (2001) Estimate of the accuracy of compound Poisson approximation for the distribution of the number of matching patterns. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 46, No 4, 667–675. [75] Mihailov V.G. (2008) Poisson-type limit theorem for the number of pairs of almost matching patterns. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 53, No 1, 59-71. [76] Minakov A.A. (2015) Compound Poisson approximation of the distribution of the number of monotone runs of fixed length. — Appl. Discrete Math., v. 28, No 2, 21–29. [77] Mori T.F. (1990) More on the waiting time till each of some given patterns occurs as a run. — Can. J. Math., v. 42, No 5, 915–932. [78] Neuhauser C. (1994) A Poisson approximation for sequence comparisons with insertions and deletions. — Ann. Statist., v. 22, No 3, 1603–1629. [79] Novak S.Y. (2011) Extreme value methods with applications to finance. — London: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. ISBN 9781439835746 S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 47

[80] Novak S.Y. (2018) On the accuracy of Poisson approximation. (submitted). [81] Pittel B.G. (1981) Limiting behavior of a process of runs. — Ann. Probab., v. 9, no. 1, 119–129. [82] Presman E.L. (1983) Approximation of binomial distributions by infinitely divisible ones. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 28, 393–403. [83] Presman E.L. (1985) The variation distance between the distribution of a sum of independent Bernoulli variables and the Poisson law. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 30, No 2, 391–396. [84] Prokhorov Y.V. (1953) Asymptotic behavior of the binomial distribution. — Uspehi Matem. Nauk, v. 8, No 3(55), 135–142. [85] Prokhorov Y.V. (1956) Convergence of random processes and limit theorems in probability theory. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 1, 157–214. [86] R¨ollin A. (2005) Approximation of sums of conditionally independent variables by the trans- lated Poisson distribution. — Bernoulli, v. 11, 1115–1128. [87] Romanowska M. (1977) A note on the upper bound for the distribution in total variation between the binomial and the Poisson distribution. — Statist. Neerlandica, v. 31, 127–130. [88] Roos M. (1994) Stein’s method for compound Poisson approximation: the local approach. — Ann. Appl. Probab., v. 4, No 4, 1177–1187. [89] Roos B. (1999) Asymptotic and sharp bounds in the Poisson approximation to the Poisson- binomial distribution. — Bernoulli, v. 5, No 6, 1021–1034. [90] Roos B. (2001) Sharp constants in the Poisson approximation. — Statist. Probab. Letters, v. 52, 155–168. [91] Roos B. (2003) Kerstan’s method for compound Poisson approximation. — Ann. Probab., v. 31, No 4, 1754–1771. [92] Roos B. (2003) Improvements in the Poisson approximation of mixed Poisson distributions. — J. Statist. Plan. Inference, v. 113, 467–483. [93] Roos B. (2015) Refined total variation bounds in the multivariate and compound Poisson approximation. — arXiv:1509.04167v1 [94] Ruzankin P.S. (2004) On the rate of Poisson process approximation to a Bernoulli process. — J. Appl. Probab., v. 41, No 1, 271–276. [95] Ruzankin P.S. (2010) Approximation for expectations of unbounded functions of dependent integer-valued random variables. — J. Appl. Prob., v. 47, 594–600. [96] Serfling R.J. (1975) A general Poisson approximation theorem. — Ann. Probab., v. 3, 726– 731. [97] Sevastyanov B.A. (1972) Limit Poisson law in a scheme of dependent random variables. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 17, No 4, 733–737. [98] Schbath S. (2000) An overview on the distribution of word counts in Markov chains. — J. Comput. Biology, v. 7, 193–201. [99] Shevtsova I.G. (2011) On the absolute constants in the BerryEsseen type inequalities for identically distributed summands. — arXiv:1111.6554v1 [100] Shorgin S.Y. (1977) Approximation of a generalized binomial distribution. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 22, No 4, 846–850. S.Y.Novak. Poisson approximation 48

[101] Smith R.L. (1988) Extreme value theory for dependent sequences via the Stein–Chen method of Poisson approximation. — Stoch. Proc. Appl., v. 30, No 2, 317–327. [102] Stein C. (1992) A way of using auxiliary randomization. — In: Probability Theory. Proc. Singapore Probab. Conf., pp. 159–180. Berlin: de Gruyter. [103] Tsaregradskii I.P. (1958) On uniform approximation of the binomial distribution with in- finitely divisible laws. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 3, No 4, 470–474. [104] Uspensky J.V. (1931) On Ch.Jordan’s series for probability. — Ann. Math., v. 32, No 2, 306–312. [105] Utev S.A. (1992) Extremal problems, characterisation, and limit theorems of Probability Theory. — DSc Thesis. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk Inst. Math., 280 pp.. [106] Vallander S.S. (1973) Calculation of the Wasserstein distance between probability distribu- tions on the line. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 18, No 4, 824-827. [107] Vasershtein L.N. (1969) Markov processes on a countable product of spaces describing large automated systems. — Probl. Inform. Trans., v. 14, 64–73. [108] Vervaat W. (1969) Upper bounds for the distance in total variation between the binomial or negative binomial and the Poisson distribution. — Statist. Neerlandica, v. 23, 79–86. [109] Witte H.-J. (1990) A unification of some approaches to Poisson approximation. — J. Appl. Probab., v. 27, No 3, pp. 611–621. [110] Xia A. (1997) On using the first difference in the Stein–Chen method. — Ann. Appl. Probab., v. 7, No 4, 899–916. [111] Xia A. (2005) Stein’s method and Poisson process approximation. — In: An introduction to Stein’s method (A.D.Barbour and L.H.Y.Chen, eds.) Singapore: World Scientific, 115–181. [112] Xia A. (2015) Stein’s method for conditional compound Poisson approximation. — Statist. Probab. Lett., v. 100, 19–26. [113] Yannaros N. (1991) Poisson approximation for random sums of Bernoulli random variables. — Statist. Probab. Lett., v. 11, 161165. [114] Zacharovas V. and Hwang H.-K. (2010) A Charlier-Parseval approach to Poisson approxi- mation and its applications. — Lith. Math. J., v. 50, No 1, 88–119. [115] Zaitsev A.Yu. (1983) On the accuracy of approximation of distributions of sums of inde- pendent random variables, which are non-zero with a small probability, by accompanying laws. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 28, No 4, 657–669. [116] Zaitsev A.Yu. (1988) A multidimensional variant of Kolmogorov’s second uniform limit theorem. Theory Prob. Appl., v. 34, 108–128. [117] Zaitsev A.Yu. (1991) An example of a distribution whose set of n-fold convolutions is uniformly separated from the set of infinitely divisible laws in the sense of the variation distance. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 36, 419–425. [118] Zaitsev A.Yu. (2005) Approximation of a sample by a Poisson point process. — J. Math. Sciences, v. 128, No 1, 2556–2563. [119] Zubkov A.M. and Mihailov V.G. (1979) On the repetitions of s–tuples in a sequence of independent trials. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 24, No 2, p. 267–279. [120] Zubkov A.M. and Serov A.A. (2012) A complete proof of universal inequalities for the distribution function of the binomial law. — Theory Probab. Appl., v. 57, No 3, 539–544.