Maximum liklihood estimators again help

  • Thread starter Thread starter semidevil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Estimators Maximum
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the calculation of Maximum Likelihood Estimators (MLE) for the probability function p_x(k; θ) = θ^k (1-θ)^{1-k}, where k = 0, 1 and 0 < θ < 1. The correct log likelihood function is ln L(θ) = k ln(θ) + (n-k) ln(1-θ). The derivative of the log likelihood, d/dθ ln L(θ) = (k/θ) - ((n-k)/(1-θ)), must be set to zero to find the MLE, resulting in θ = k/n. This clarification emphasizes the importance of using the complete expression for p_x(k; θ) and applying the chain rule during differentiation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE)
  • Familiarity with probability functions and their properties
  • Knowledge of logarithmic functions and their derivatives
  • Experience with calculus, particularly differentiation techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of MLE for different probability distributions
  • Learn about the application of the chain rule in calculus
  • Explore the concept of log likelihood in statistical modeling
  • Investigate common pitfalls in MLE calculations and how to avoid them
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data scientists, and anyone involved in statistical modeling or estimation techniques will benefit from this discussion, particularly those focusing on Maximum Likelihood Estimation.

semidevil
Messages
156
Reaction score
2
I dotn know, I'm still lost on this whole MLE thing...but here is my attempt at some problems...please critique(just the concept is still bugging me).

find the MLE:

[tex]p_x(k;\theta) = \theta^k (1-\theta)^{1-k}, . k = 0, 1, 0 < \theta < 1[/tex].

so here is what I did.

[tex]L(\theta) = \theta^{nk} ( 1- \theta)^{{\sum_1^n{n - k}}[/tex]

[tex]ln L(\theta) = nkln\theta + \sum_1^k 1-k * ln(1-\theta)[/tex]

now, take derivative

[tex]nk/\theta + \sum_1^k/{1-\theta}[/tex].

first of all, in geting the formula, is this right? I know I will need to leave it in terms of theta, but I don't know if even this is right??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
now, to find maximum, set the derivative to 0, so 0 = nk/\theta + \sum_1^k/{1-\theta} and then solve for theta\theta = nk/{\sum_1^k 1-k} so MLE = \theta = nk/{\sum_1^k 1-k} Please let me know if this is correct, or if I am just completely off track!
 



Hi there,

Thank you for sharing your attempt at finding the MLE for this problem. Overall, your approach is correct, but there are a few minor mistakes that need to be addressed.

First, when taking the log likelihood, you need to use the entire expression for p_x(k; \theta), not just the exponent. So the correct expression for ln L(\theta) should be:

ln L(\theta) = kln\theta + (n-k)ln(1-\theta)

Also, when taking the derivative, you need to use the chain rule. So the correct derivative would be:

d/d\theta ln L(\theta) = (k/\theta) + ((n-k)/(1-\theta))(-1)

= k/\theta - (n-k)/(1-\theta)

= (k-n\theta)/(1-\theta)

Finally, to find the MLE, you need to set this derivative equal to 0 and solve for \theta. So you would have:

(k-n\theta)/(1-\theta) = 0

k-n\theta = 0

n\theta = k

\theta = k/n

Therefore, the MLE for this problem is \theta = k/n.

I hope this helps clarify the concept of MLE for you. Just remember to use the entire expression for p_x(k; \theta) when taking the log likelihood, and to use the chain rule when taking derivatives. Keep practicing and you'll get the hang of it!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K