MHB Binomial Distribution in the Exponential Family of Distributions

Rashad9607
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
A pdf is of the exponential family if it can be written $ f(x|\theta)=h(x)c(\theta)exp(\sum_{i=1}^{k}{w_{i}(\theta)t_{i}(x))}$ with $\theta$ a finite parameter vector, $c(\theta)>0$, all functions are over the reals, and only $h(x)$ is possibly constant.

I would like to show the binomial distribution with parameters $\theta=(p,n)$ is not in the exponential family.

Actually, if we consider $n$ to be constant, it is an exponential member:

$f(x|\theta)=p^{x}(1-p)^{n-x}\binom{n}{x}=\binom{n}{x}(1-p)^{n}(\frac{p}{1-p})^{x}=\binom{n}{x}(1-p)^{n}exp(x*log(\frac{p}{1-p}))$

Because $n$ is given, $\binom{n}{x}$ is a function of $x$ and will be $h(x)$.

$c(\theta)=(1-p)^{n}$.

$w_{1}(\theta)=log(\frac{p}{1-p})$ and $t_{1}(x)=x$.

If we instead want to consider the full parameter space where $n$ is not given, the binomial distribution is not a member of the exponential family.

Say we wanted to try and fit it into the exponential family model. The $\binom{n}{x}$ term would need to be split into a product of separate functions of $x$ and $n$ to be incorporated into $h(x)c(\theta)$, or split into a sum of products of separate functions to be incorporated into the summation term.

I was able to show that $\binom{n}{x}$ cannot be expressed as a product $u(n)v(x)$, so what is left is showing that it won't work in the summation term either. This means showing that $log(\binom{n}{x})$ is inexpressible as $\sum_{i=1}^{k}{w_{i}(n)t_{i}(x)}$, with $w_{i}$ and $t_{i}$ nonconstant, which I haven't been able to do. Any thoughts are appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
So I have read the next section in my text and learned that a characteristic of exponential family distributions is that the values $x$ can take must be the same over the entire parameter space. If we take $\theta=(p,n)$, then x=0,1,2,...,n, which depends on $\theta$, so it cannot be an exponential distribution.

But I'd still like to prove the log(nCr) thing.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top