Contact rate between individuals of different probability density functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the likelihood of encounters between two individuals, each represented by a probability density function over space and time. Participants explore the mathematical approaches to quantify contact rates, including potential methods such as area overlap and convolution, while also addressing the complexities of modeling continuous motion and the implications of stochastic processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests solving for contact likelihood by finding the area overlap between the two probability density functions or by taking their convolution, expressing uncertainty about the applicability of convolution.
  • Another participant questions the clarity of the problem, noting that a simple probability density function may not adequately describe continuous motion and that a stochastic process might be necessary for accurate modeling.
  • A later reply clarifies that the inquiry pertains to a real-world problem involving steady-state solutions to Fokker-Planck equations, indicating a spatio-temporally continuous system.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need to specify how probability is introduced into deterministic trajectories, arguing that random sampling from a probability density function does not accurately represent continuous motion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the adequacy of probability density functions for modeling continuous motion, with some advocating for stochastic processes while others focus on the mathematical approaches to quantify contact likelihood. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best method to model the problem.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the nature of motion and the applicability of probability density functions. The discussion highlights the need for clarity on whether the problem is discrete or continuous and the implications of using different mathematical models.

nigels
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I'm interested in obtaining some measure of contact (or encounter) likelihood between two individuals, each is spatially distributed with some probability density function at time ##t## such that,

Space use of individual 1 = ##u(\mathbf{x}, t)##
Space use of individual 2 = ##v(\mathbf{x}, t)##

Would I solve for the area overlap between ##u(\mathbf{x},t)## and ##v(\mathbf{x},t)##, perhaps by taking the integral of their joint distribution? Or should I take the convolution of the two? Frankly, I'm not sure when convolution method is actually applicable. Furthermore, once I have the contact rates at time ##t## across the entire domain, to find its value within a certain region (say, ##a \leq x \leq b## in 1D domain), do I simply take the integral of the resultant contact PDF from ##a## to ##b##?

Sorry if this question is too elementary. I really appreciate all your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your question isn't too elementary. I can't understand it!
 
nigels said:
I'm interested in obtaining some measure of contact (or encounter) likelihood between two individuals, each is spatially distributed with some probability density function at time ##t## such that,

Space use of individual 1 = ##u(\mathbf{x}, t)##
Space use of individual 2 = ##v(\mathbf{x}, t)##

This sounds like a description of a real world problem, but it needs refining. If we give a density function for the probability that a particle is "at position x at time t" and ask something about what happens in a "time interval" then we need more than the the density function to answer such a question.

The particle might be moving from place to place in a continuous fashion. A person who took someI (position,time) measurements could fit a probability density function u(x,t) to the data, but that function isn't a model for how the particle is moving because it doesn't capture the requirement for continuous motion.

If we assume that a trajectory of the particle is generated by taking an independent random sample from the density u(x,t) at each instant of time t, then we have a very jumpy discontinuous motion , more jumpy than "Brownian" motion. The mathematics of something moving in "randomly" in time needs to be described by a "stochastic process", not merely by a probability density function.

If you are dealing with events given by discrete intervals of space and time (like "person A is in room 25 during the hour 3 of the day") and you don't intend to subdivide these intervals then it might be possible to model movement by taking a random sample from a discrete density u(x,t) at each discrete interval of time. Is your problem discrete?
 
Hi Stephen,

My question does pertain to a real-world problem, and the two dependent variables are actually steady-state solutions to a set of Fokker-Planck equations modeling an advection-diffusion process given static point-attractors. So the system is spatio-temporally continuous (time interval converges to zero in the derivation of the Fokker-Planck).
 
Last edited:
If you have trajectories that are solutions to a deterministic set of equations and you want to introduce probability into the picture then you must be specific about how this probability arises. For example, you might have a distribution on the set of initial conditions and pick an initial condition at random and then pick the trajectory that is a solution for that initial condition. This is a random selection of an entire trajectory, not a random selection of a single point (x,t). If you dealing with data from an experiment then probability might enter the picture as a random error in measurement.

If you have specific trajectory x = f(t) and pick t at random from some distribution then you can find the value of x. This gives a random selection of (x,t). However, a probability density u(x,t) fit to such data is not a good model for continuous motion of given particle. In continuous motion, the particle's position at (x,t+h) is not independent of the position at (x,t). So independent random samples from u(x,t) "at each instant of time" do not model the trajectory of a single particle correctly.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K