I have a university lecturer that puts a lot of emphasis on the writing quality of an answer, not just if its correct. He wants our answers to be 5 things, Clear, Complete, Concise, Coherent and Correct. He says he doesn't believe in perfect answers so can be very nit-picky over our solutions, but it also means he can be contradictory. For example in one of my solutions he said i had been repetitive but firstly, the repeated line (which was something like, "by the law of total variance") was there to help the narrative of the answer - which he puts so much emphasis on - and it was repeated from part 1 of a question after quite a few lines of integration. But secondly and more importantly, in his very own solution, he had the exact same repetition. And he said my answer was very good and he was being really nitpicky but that i could at some point write more detail, like write "the pdf of X is f(x)=..." rather than just go straight into "f(x)=..."
So my question is how do you strike a balance between explaining enough and becoming too laborious? Also what are some good connecting words in proofs and 'show me' questions and when do you use which? Because i just tend to stick in 'and', 'because', 'so' 'thus' etc, when prehaps sometimes it isn't strictly true (but does get the point across)
An example of such a question: Let X~Gamma($\alpha,\beta$) where $\beta$ is a rate parameter. Find the MGF of X and use this to show that $\Bbb{E}(X)=\frac{\alpha}{\beta}$ and $var(X)=\frac{\alpha}{\beta^2}$
Let X~Gamma($\alpha , \beta$)
Then the PDF of X is: $$f(x)=\frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}x^{(\alpha-1)}e^{-\beta x}dx $$ ,for $x>0$ and 0 otherwise, where $$\Gamma(\alpha)=\int_0^\inf t^{\alpha-1}e^{-t}dt$$
$$M_X(t)=\mathbb{E}(e^{tX})=\int_0^\inf e^{tx}f(x)dx$$ $$=\frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\inf e^{tx}x^{\alpha-1}e^{-\beta x}dx$$ $$=\frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}int_0^\inf x^{\alpha-1}e^{-(\beta-t) x}dx$$
Let $$u=(\beta-t)x$$ $$\iff x=\frac{u}{\beta-t}$$ $$\implies dx=(\beta-t)du$$
So $$M_X(t)=\frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\inf (\frac{u}{\beta-t})^{\alpha-1}e^-u(\beta-t)du$$ $$=\frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(\frac{1}{\beta-t})^{\alpha}\int_0^\inf u^{\alpha-1}e^{-u}du$$ $$\frac{\beta^\alpha}{(\beta-t)^\alpha}$$
To show that $\Bbb{E}(X)=\frac{\alpha}{\beta}$ and $var(X)=\frac{\alpha}{\beta^2}$: Using differentiation gives us: $$M'(t)=\frac{\alpha\beta^\alpha}{(\beta-t)^{\alpha+1}}$$ and $$ M''(t)=\frac{\alpha(\alpha+1)\beta^\alpha}{(\beta-t)^{\alpha+21}}$$ It follows that $$\Bbb{E}(X)=M'(0)=\frac{\alpha\beta^\alpha}{\beta^{\alpha+1}}=\frac{\alpha}{\beta}$$ and $$\Bbb{E}(X^2)=M''(0)=\frac{\alpha(\alpha+1)\beta^\alpha}{\beta^{\alpha+21}}=\frac{\alpha(\alpha+1)}{\beta^2}$$ Hence $$ var(X)=\Bbb{E}(X^2)-\Bbb{E}(X)^2$$ $$=\frac{\alpha(\alpha+1)}{\beta^2}-\frac{\alpha^2}{\beta^2}$$ $$=\frac{\alpha}{\beta^2}$$ as required
I know i need connecting words before i calculate the M(t) but i have no idea what to put, plus I'm not sure if where I've put "it follows that" is strictly true, also i feel like where i've used "So" there might be a better word to use but i can't think what