Finding MLE for $\theta$ of Statistical Product Model

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Likelihood
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) for the parameter $\theta$ in a discrete statistical product model involving geometrically distributed random variables. Participants explore the likelihood function, the process of maximizing it, and the specific calculations required to estimate $\theta$ based on given sample data.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants clarify that the likelihood function should be expressed as a product over the range $1 \leq i \leq n$ and provide a closed-form expression for it.
  • There is a suggestion to use the logarithm of the likelihood function to simplify the maximization process for $\theta$.
  • Participants derive the log-likelihood function and its derivative, leading to an equation to solve for $\theta$.
  • One participant proposes that the estimator for $\theta$ can be expressed as $\theta = \frac{n}{\sum_{i=1}^n x_i}$ based on their calculations.
  • There is a discussion about using the derived estimator with specific sample data to compute a concrete value for $\theta$.
  • A plot of the likelihood function is shared, indicating the maximum likelihood estimate visually.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the steps to derive the likelihood function and the method for maximizing it. However, there is no explicit consensus on the correctness of all intermediate steps, as some participants express uncertainty about their calculations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty regarding the completeness and correctness of their derivations, particularly in the context of maximizing the likelihood function and the specific calculations for $\theta$.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students or practitioners interested in statistical modeling, particularly those working with maximum likelihood estimation in discrete probability distributions.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :giggle:

For $n \in \mathbb{N}$ we consider the discrete statistical product model $(X ,(P_{\theta})_{\theta \in\Theta})$ with $X = \mathbb{N}^n$, $\Theta = (0, 1)$ and $p_{\theta}(x_i) = \theta(1 -\theta)^{x_i−1}$
for all $x_i \in \mathbb{N}, \theta \in \Theta$. So $n$ independent, identical experiments are carried out, the outcomes of which are modeled by independent, geometrically distributed random variables with an unknown probability of success $\theta$.
(a) Give the corresponding likelihood function.
(b) Determine an estimator for the parameter $\theta$ using the maximum likelihood method (for samples $x$ that do not consist only of ones). Note intermediate steps.
(c) You observe the following sample $x$: $$4 \ \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ \ 7 \ \ \ \ \ 4 \ \ \ \ \ 3 \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ 8 \ \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ \ 4 \ \ \ \ \ 5$$ Give the concrete estimated value for $\theta$ for $x$ using the estimator of part (b).I have done the following :

(a) The likelihood function is $$L_x(\theta)=\prod_{i\in \mathbb{N}}p_{\theta}(x_i)$$ or not? Can wecalculate that further or do we let that as it is?(b) We have to calculate the supremum of $L_x(\theta)$ as for $\theta$, right?

:unsure:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi mathmari,

Nice job so far. Here are a few ideas to keep things moving along.

(a) The product should be for $1\leq i\leq n$. Using this fact and the formula for $p_{\theta}(x_{i})$, we can take your work a step further to obtain a closed-form expression for the likelihood.

(b) You will need to calculate the value of $\theta$ that maximizes the likelihood function from part (a), given the data $x_{i}$. This means the value of $\theta$ you calculate will depend on (i.e., be a function of) $x_{i}$. This can be done by differentiating with respect to $\theta$, setting this equal to zero and solving for $\theta.$ However, to make your life easier, I would strongly suggest taking the logarithm of the likelihood function before you calculate the value of $\theta$. Since the logarithm function is monotonic/order-preserving, the so-called "log-likelihood" function and the original likelihood function are maximized for the same value of $\theta$.

Feel free to let me know if anything remains unclear.
 
GJA said:
(a) The product should be for $1\leq i\leq n$. Using this fact and the formula for $p_{\theta}(x_{i})$, we can take your work a step further to obtain a closed-form expression for the likelihood.

We have that $$L_x(\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^np_{\theta}(x_i)=\prod_{i=1}^n \theta(1 -\theta)^{x_i−1}= \theta^n(1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n} $$

Is that correct? :unsure:
 
mathmari said:
We have that $$L_x(\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^np_{\theta}(x_i)=\prod_{i=1}^n \theta(1 -\theta)^{x_i−1}= \theta^n(1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n} $$

Is that correct? :unsure:

Exactly, nice job!

For part (b) you're trying to determine the value for $\theta$ that maximizes $L_{x}(\theta)$ for the given data $x_{i}$; i.e., you're thinking of the $x_{i}$ as fixed so that $L_{x}(\theta)$ is being considered as a function of $\theta$. Using the fact that $\ln\left[L_{x}(\theta)\right]$ and $L_{x}(\theta)$ are maximized for the same value of $\theta$ will make solving for $\theta$ less laborious. However you choose to proceed, taking a derivative, setting it equal to zero and solving for $\theta$ will produce the desired result.
 
GJA said:
For part (b) you're trying to determine the value for $\theta$ that maximizes $L_{x}(\theta)$ for the given data $x_{i}$; i.e., you're thinking of the $x_{i}$ as fixed so that $L_{x}(\theta)$ is being considered as a function of $\theta$. Using the fact that $\ln\left[L_{x}(\theta)\right]$ and $L_{x}(\theta)$ are maximized for the same value of $\theta$ will make solving for $\theta$ less laborious. However you choose to proceed, taking a derivative, setting it equal to zero and solving for $\theta$ will produce the desired result.

So we have \begin{align*}&g(\theta) = \ln \left (L_x(\theta)\right )=\ln \left (\theta^n(1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right ) =\ln \left (\theta^n\right )+\ln \left ((1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )=n\cdot \ln \left (\theta\right )+\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \ln \left (1 -\theta\right )\\ &g'(\theta)=n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}-\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} \\ &g'(\theta)=0 \Rightarrow n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}-\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} =0 \Rightarrow n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}=\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} \Rightarrow n\cdot (1-\theta)=\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \theta\\ &\Rightarrow n-n\cdot \theta=\theta\cdot \sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n\cdot \theta\Rightarrow n=\theta\cdot \sum_{i=1}^nx_i \Rightarrow \theta= \frac{n}{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i}\end{align*} Is that correct and complete ? :unsure:

At (c) do we use $\theta= \frac{n}{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i}$ for $n=10$ and $\sum_{i=1}^nx_i=4 + 2 + 7 + 4 + 3 + 1 + 8+ 2 + 4 + 5=40$ ? :unsure:
 
mathmari said:
So we have \begin{align*}&g(\theta) = \ln \left (L_x(\theta)\right )=\ln \left (\theta^n(1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right ) =\ln \left (\theta^n\right )+\ln \left ((1 -\theta)^{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )=n\cdot \ln \left (\theta\right )+\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \ln \left (1 -\theta\right )\\ &g'(\theta)=n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}-\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} \\ &g'(\theta)=0 \Rightarrow n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}-\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} =0 \Rightarrow n\cdot \frac{1}{\theta}=\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \frac{1}{1 -\theta} \Rightarrow n\cdot (1-\theta)=\left ({\sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n}\right )\cdot \theta\\ &\Rightarrow n-n\cdot \theta=\theta\cdot \sum_{i=1}^nx_i−n\cdot \theta\Rightarrow n=\theta\cdot \sum_{i=1}^nx_i \Rightarrow \theta= \frac{n}{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i}\end{align*} Is that correct and complete ? :unsure:

At (c) do we use $\theta= \frac{n}{\sum_{i=1}^nx_i}$ for $n=10$ and $\sum_{i=1}^nx_i=4 + 2 + 7 + 4 + 3 + 1 + 8+ 2 + 4 + 5=40$ ? :unsure:

You're correct on everything; great job!
 
Here is a plot of the likelihood function for part (c), where $n=10$ and $\sum_{i}x_{i} = 40$. As you can see, it's maximized for $\theta=0.25$, as it should be from your derivation in part (b).

Likelihood_Function_Plot.png
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K