Dependencies of Inference on Information Theory.

AI Thread Summary
Classical and Bayesian statistical inference are valuable for addressing information theory challenges and enhancing data management in learning algorithms. However, the reverse application—using information theory to inform inference—remains less clear. Knowledge of information theory is often deemed beneficial for solving inference problems, such as parameter estimation. The literature highlights the reliance on approximations due to the vast number of hypotheses in many scenarios. In specific cases, like radar signal detection, exact solutions can be achieved through various methodologies, demonstrating the interconnectedness of these fields.
pablotano
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I understand how using classical or bayesian statistical inference os often very helpful for solving information theory problems, or for improvements in data managing or manipulation of learning algorithms. But the other way around (using I.T knowledge to find a way in inference), I can't find it clear enough. Is information theory knowledge necessary (or at least recommended) for solving inference problems, like parameter estimation for example?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a huge literature on using information theory and Bayesian inference to perform parameter estimation. In many (most) problems, the number of hypotheses that must be tested is astronomically large, precluding a direct solution. The literature is full, therefore, of approximations and compromises to make an estimation problem practical.

Sometimes an exact solution is possible. One example is in detecting the presence of a radar return in noise. Cook and Bernfeld's text "Radar Signals" shows that in this case, the same optimal detector design results from a) maximizing the output signal-to-noise ratio, b) applying statistical decision theory, and c) solving the problem using Bayesian inverse probability.
 
Last edited:
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top