Comparing probabilities of Binomially-distributed RVs

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TaPaKaH
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probabilities
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of the probability ##\mathbb{P}(p_1 \geq p_2)## for two series of independent Bernoulli experiments with unknown success probabilities ##p_1## and ##p_2##. Participants explore various statistical approaches and assumptions related to this problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the problem is equivalent to the two distributions being equal, suggesting that if the ratios are equal, then the expected value of the difference would be zero.
  • Another participant proposes a two-sample test with a null hypothesis of ##H_0: p_1 = p_2## and an alternative hypothesis of ##H_a: p_1 > p_2##, suggesting a one-tailed T test using pooled variance.
  • A participant asserts that computing ##\mathbb{P}(p_1 \geq p_2)## is not possible without prior assumptions about the probabilities, indicating that the assumption of ##p_1 \geq p_2## is not specific enough for computation.
  • In contrast, another participant explains that Bayes' theorem can be used to compute ##\mathbb{P}(p_1 \geq p_2)##, emphasizing the need for a joint prior probability distribution and detailing the process of deriving the posterior distribution based on observed successes.
  • This latter participant notes that the result will depend on the chosen prior distribution and provides a mathematical formulation for the likelihood of the observed data.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of computing ##\mathbb{P}(p_1 \geq p_2)## without prior assumptions, with some advocating for Bayesian approaches while others highlight the limitations of the assumptions involved. No consensus is reached regarding the best method to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on prior distributions in Bayesian statistics and the implications of different statistical tests. There are unresolved questions about the equivalence of the distributions and the assumptions necessary for computation.

TaPaKaH
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
Suppose we have two series of independent Bernoulli experiments with unknown probabilities ##p_1## and ##p_2##. The first series registers ##x_1## successes in ##n_1## trials while the second series registers ##x_2## successes in ##n_2## trials. Is there a way that we can compute probability ##\mathbb{P}(p_1\geq p_2)##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have seen a two-sample test with null hypothesis ##H_0: p_1 = p_2 ## and alternative hypothesis ##H_a: p_1>p_2##. This would call for a 1-tailed T test using pooled variance.
This question seems like a variation on that standard problem.
 
Isnt this equivalent to the two distributions being equal? If the two ratios are equal, then E|X_1=X_2|=0 , right?
 
TaPaKaH said:
Is there a way that we can compute probability ##\mathbb{P}(p_1\geq p_2)##?

No, not unless you have some assumption or knowledge about the "prior" probability of that happening.

If you make specific assumptions about the probabilities, you can can compute the probability of various aspects of the data being what was observed. However the assumption that p_1 \geq p_2 isn't specific enough to do that. I think you must at least assume that p_1 = p_2.
 
TaPaKaH said:
Suppose we have two series of independent Bernoulli experiments with unknown probabilities ##p_1## and ##p_2##. The first series registers ##x_1## successes in ##n_1## trials while the second series registers ##x_2## successes in ##n_2## trials. Is there a way that we can compute probability ##\mathbb{P}(p_1\geq p_2)##?
Yes it is called Bayes' theorem. You must start by assuming some joint prior probability distribution of p_1 and p_2, representing your (lack of) knowledge about p_1 and p_2 before doing the experiment. Then you observe x_1 and x_2. Now you compute the probability distribution of p_1 and p_2 given x_1 and x_2 using the formula posterior density is proportional to prior density times likelihood. Normalise it to integrate to 1. Compute the probability that p_1 is greater than or equal to p_2.

Trouble is, the result will depend on your prior probability distribution of p_1 and p_2. According to the principles of Bayesian statistics, this prior distribution should represent your beliefs about p_1 and p_2 before doing the experiment.

The likelihood for p_1 and p_2 is proportional to lik(p_1, p_2) = p_1^{x_1} (1 - p_1}^{n_1 - x_1} . p_2^{x_2} (1 - p_2}^{n_2 - x_2}. So if for instance you start with uniform independent priors for p_1 and p_2, the answer is the integral of the likelihood over all p_1 greater than or equal to p_2, divided by the integral of the likelihood over all p_1 and p_2.

This results in an exercise concerning two independent beta distributed random variables. See for instance http://stats.stackexchange.com/ques...lity-px-y-given-x-bea1-b1-and-y-bea2-b2-and-x
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K