A Does Maximizing Likelihood Over Truncated Support Increase Probability?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter kullbach_liebler
  • Start date Start date
kullbach_liebler
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Suppose ##\mathbf{X}## is a random variable with a finite support ##\Omega## and with some pdf ##f(\cdot; \mathbf{v}_0)## where ##\mathbf{v}_0## is the parameter vector. Define, ##\mathcal{A}:= \{\mathbf{x}:S(\mathbf{x}) \geq \gamma\} \subset \Omega## and ##\tilde{\mathbf{x}}:=S(\tilde{\mathbf{x}}) = \gamma##, ##\mathcal{B}:=\{\mathbf{x} \geq \tilde{\mathbf{x}}\}## where ##S:\mathbf{x} \mapsto \mathbb{R}^n##. Moreover, suppose that,

$$\#(\mathcal{B} \cap \mathcal{A}) > \#(\neg \mathcal{B} \cap \mathcal{A})$$
and
$$!\exists \mathbf{x}^*>\tilde{\mathbf{x}}:=\arg \max_{\mathbf{x}}S(\mathbf{x}).$$

Then, it implies that,

\begin{align}
\max_{\mathbf{v}}\sum_{\mathbf{x} :S(\mathbf{x}) \geq \gamma} f(\mathbf{x};\mathbf{v}) > \sum_{\mathbf{x} :S(\mathbf{x}) \geq \gamma} f(\mathbf{x};\mathbf{v}_0)
\end{align}

My questions:

1) Is the statement true?;
2) How could I improve the presentation of this proposition?;
3) What are the mildest possible conditions under which (1) will hold?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
kullbach_liebler said:
2) How could I improve the presentation of this proposition?;
I don't know what a statistical journal would want, but for the purpose of getting an answer on an internet forum, you could give a more verbal statement of the proposition before presenting it using only notation.

\begin{align}
\max_{\mathbf{v}}\sum_{\mathbf{x} :S(\mathbf{x}) \geq \gamma} f(\mathbf{x};\mathbf{v}) > \sum_{\mathbf{x} :S(\mathbf{x}) \geq \gamma} f(\mathbf{x};\mathbf{v}_0)
\end{align}

This appears to say the maximum value of a function ( which is a summation rather than an integration) when taken over a set is greater than the value of that function evaluated at the particular element ##v_o## in that set. Is that the general idea?
 
kullbach_liebler said:
1) Is the statement true?
Let ## \mathbf{v_max} ## be a value of ## \mathbf{v} ## which maximizes the sum. What happens when ## \mathbf{v_0} = \mathbf{v_max} ##?
 
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