Conditional probability with joint condition

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of Bayes' Rule in the context of conditional probability involving joint conditions, specifically Pr(Z|X&Y). Participants clarify that Pr(Z|X&Y) can be expressed using Bayes' Rule, emphasizing that if X and Y are independent, it does not imply independence when conditioned on Z. An example involving two coins illustrates how conditioning can create dependence between events A and B. The conversation confirms that Bayes' Rule remains valid as long as the probability of A is not zero. Overall, the thread highlights the nuances of conditional independence and the consistent applicability of Bayes' Rule.
Cognac
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So say I have Pr(Z|X&Y)

I'm guessing that it follows the standard Pr(A|B)=[Pr(B|A)Pr(A)]/Pr(B)

So Pr(Z|X&Y)=[Pr(X&Y|Z)Pr(Z)]/Pr(X&Y)?Also, if X&Y are independent, then would I get Pr(X&Y|Z)=Pr(X|Z)Pr(Y|Z)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Cognac said:
Pr(A|B)=Pr(B|A)Pr(A)
What? If A=B, this would say that Pr(A)=1.
Also, if X&Y are independent, then would I get Pr(X&Y|Z)=Pr(X|Z)Pr(Y|Z)?
No. A and B may be independent in general but not independent given Z. Example: toss two coins. A=coin 1 is heads. B=coin 2 is heads. Z=coins 1 and 2 match. Obviously Z forces a dependence between A and B.
 
Last edited:
FactChecker said:
What? If A=B, this would say that Pr(A)=1.

No. A and B may be independent in general but not independent given Z. Example: toss two coins. A=coin 1 is heads. B=coin 2 is heads. Z=coins 1 and 2 match. Obviously Z forces a dependence between A and B.
Thanks, that example about independence makes things make more sense now.

Oh sorry about that. I forgot to divide by the conditional. But does Bayes Rule still work for the case I presented? Given two joint events, X&Y?
 
Cognac said:
I forgot to divide by the conditional. But does Bayes Rule still work for the case I presented? Given two joint events, X&Y?
By "divide by the conditional", I assume you mean "divide the right side by P(A)". Yes, Bayes' Rule always works. The only exception to the form of Bayes' Rule that you are using is if P(A) = 0. Then both P(B|A) and the division of the right side by 0 are problems. (Some statements of Bayes' Rule talk about a partitioning of the space. If you use ever that form, make sure that condition is met.)
 
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top