Categorical approach to probability?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion explores the intersection of category theory and probability theory, specifically examining how probability can be understood through categorical frameworks. The participant expresses interest in whether probability theory can be represented in a purely category-theoretic manner, noting that only categories with monadic diagrams may exhibit limits. Additionally, the conversation touches on the concept of treating random variables as generalized elements, prompting inquiries about the types of random variables involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of category theory concepts, particularly monadic diagrams.
  • Familiarity with probability theory, including discrete and continuous random variables.
  • Knowledge of syntactic treatments in mathematical contexts.
  • Basic grasp of limits in categorical frameworks.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the application of category theory in probability, focusing on monadic structures.
  • Explore the concept of generalized elements in the context of random variables.
  • Study examples of categorical representations of probability distributions.
  • Investigate existing literature on the categorical approach to probability theory.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and students of advanced mathematics interested in the theoretical foundations of probability and its categorical interpretations.

icantadd
Messages
109
Reaction score
0
I am interested in, and try to understand category theory. At the same time, I am taking my first (real) probability class. I am wondering if there is a way to understand probability theory through categories, and more importantly, if so, would it be interesting? It seems that there would only be very trivial limits, i.e. only categories with monadic diagrams would have limits.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can do the usual translations, but I haven't seen anyone present probability theory in a purely category theoretic manner.

One little point is, in my opinion, I think there's merit in syntactically treating random variables as generalized elements.
 
Last edited:
Hurkyl said:
One little point is, in my opinion, I think there's merit in syntactically treating random variables as generalized elements.

What do you mean, syntactically treating random variables as generalized elements. Are you talking about discrete random variables, continuous random variables, or all being generalized in some way? If the latter, I would love to see this expounded upon, maybe if you could, some examples.
 
If there are an infinite number of natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two natural numbers, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and an infinite number of fractions in between any two of those fractions, and... then that must mean that there are not only infinite infinities, but an infinite number of those infinities. and an infinite number of those...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K