Beta Distributed Random Variates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around methods for generating random numbers from the beta distribution, specifically addressing the confusion surrounding the relationship between the beta distribution and exponential random variates. Participants explore the implications of using exponential distributions to derive beta-distributed samples and the support intervals of these distributions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of a statement regarding the generation of beta-distributed random variates from IID exponential random variates, noting the differing support intervals of the distributions.
  • Another participant suggests using uniform random variables over [0,1] instead, citing connections to Bayesian inference and the interpretation of the beta integral.
  • A participant expresses skepticism about opaque statements in literature, emphasizing the availability of libraries for generating beta samples and the importance of understanding the underlying methods.
  • Further thoughts include the probability interpretation of the beta integral and its applications in various contexts, such as Naive Bayes classifiers and ranking systems.
  • One participant elaborates on the structure of the fraction used to generate beta variates, indicating that both the numerator and denominator share a common summand.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using exponential random variates to generate beta-distributed samples, with some advocating for alternative methods. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to sample from the beta distribution.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the assumptions made in the original statement and the implications of using different distributions for sampling. There is also mention of the need for clarity in the literature regarding established methods.

BOAS
Messages
546
Reaction score
19
Hello,

I am looking at different methods for generating random numbers from the beta distribution. I am a bit confused about the following statement:

"It is known that if ##a, b ∈ N_{>0} = \{1, 2, 3, . . .\}##, ##Y = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^a X_i}{\sum_{j=1}^{a+b}X_k}## is ##\mathrm{Be}(a, b)##-distributed where ##X_1, X_2, . . .## are IID Exp(1) random variates."

What I am confused by is the different intervals of support that the beta distribution and exponential distribution have. The beta distribution is supported on [0,1] whereas the exponential distribution on [0, inf).

It seems that this method for generating samples from the beta distribution results in values greater than 1 which should otherwise be zero.

So what does one typically do in this situation?
Generate samples from a truncated exponential?
Throw away samples that are outside the support interval of the beta distribution?

I hope my question is clear,

thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BOAS said:
Hello,

I am looking at different methods for generating random numbers from the beta distribution. I am a bit confused about the following statement:

"It is known that if ##a, b ∈ N_{>0} = \{1, 2, 3, . . .\}##, ##Y = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^a X_i}{\sum_{j=1}^{a+b}X_k}## is ##\mathrm{Be}(a, b)##-distributed where ##X_1, X_2, . . .## are IID Exp(1) random variates."
append: ##[0,1]## uniform random variables.

- - - -
Try that instead. With respect to a conjugate prior in Bayesian Inference, order statistics, and even a combinatorial interpretation of the the Beta integral (for the normalizing constant), the interpretation is always for uniform random variable over ##[0,1]## -- or ##(0,1)##. I have a hunch that that is what was being aimed at here.
- - - -
In general I'm not such a fan of opaque 'it is known that statements', especially when they are wrong. There are plenty of built-in libraries for generating from Beta, so I'm not really sure what you're aiming to do here.
 
Last edited:
StoneTemplePython said:
append: ##[0,1]## uniform random variables.

- - - -
Try that instead. With respect to a conjugate prior in Bayesian Inference, order statistics, and even a combinatorial interpretation of the the Beta integral (for the normalizing constant), the interpretation is always for uniform random variable over ##[0,1]## -- or ##(0,1)##. I have a hunch that that is what was being aimed at here.
- - - -
In general I'm not such a fan of opaque 'it is known that statements', especially when they are wrong. There are plenty of built-in libraries for generating from Beta, so I'm not really sure what you're aiming to do here.

Thank you, that looks much better!

I know that there are libraries for sampling from many of these distributions but I am learning a bit about different methods of doing so. The point is to generate the samples.
 
BOAS said:
Thank you, that looks much better!

I know that there are libraries for sampling from many of these distributions but I am learning a bit about different methods of doing so. The point is to generate the samples.

A couple other thoughts:the beta integral itself has a very nice probability interpretation which may help you get some intuition for what's going on here. I know I enjoy this video from MIT's 6.041x on edx (video hosted on youtube)



- - - -
if you are interested in computing, and have ever looked at building a Spam vs Ham classifier (a very simple Naive Bayes project) the Beta pdf comes up very naturally as a (conjugate) prior.

And finally, to the extent you are interested in ranking things like sports teams, you may find it interesting to see the Beta distribution lurking in part 3 of the below link, under "The Basic Statistic — Laplace’s Method". The Colley ranking system is used in BCS system for ranking college football -- its simple, transparent and unreasonably effective.

http://www.colleyrankings.com/matrate.pdf
 
Last edited:
BOAS said:
"It is known that if ##a, b ∈ N_{>0} = \{1, 2, 3, . . .\}##, ##Y = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^a X_i}{\sum_{j=1}^{a+b}X_k}## is ##\mathrm{Be}(a, b)##-distributed where ##X_1, X_2, . . .## are IID Exp(1) random variates."

It seems that this method for generating samples from the beta distribution results in values greater than 1 which should otherwise be zero.
Both the numerator and denominator contain the common summand ##( X_1 + X_2 + ...X_a) = S ## So the fraction is of the form ##Y = \frac{S}{S+p} ## where ##p = \sum_{j=a+1}^{a+b} X_j##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K