How Can Lagrange Multipliers Determine Maximum Shannon Entropy?

Irishdoug
Messages
102
Reaction score
16
Homework Statement
Given a random variable X with d possible outcomes and distribution p(x),prove that the Shannon entropy is maximised for the uniform distribution where all outcomes are equally likely p(x) =1/d
Relevant Equations
## H(X) = - \sum_{x}^{} p(x)log_{2}p(x) ##

##log_{2}## is used as the course is a Quantum Information one.
I have used the Lagrange multiplier way of answering. So I have set up the equation with the constraint that ## \sum_{x}^{} p(x) = 1##

So I have:

##L(x,\lambda) = - \sum_{x}^{} p(x)log_{2}p(x) - \lambda(\sum_{x}^{} p(x) - 1) = 0##

I am now supposed to take the partial derivatives with respect to p(x) and ##\lambda##, however the derivatives with respect to ##\lambda## will give 0 I believe as we have to constants, 1 and -1.

So ##\frac{\partial (- \sum_{x}^{} p(x)log_{2}p(x) - \lambda(\sum_{x}^{} p(x) - 1)) }{\partial p(x)} = -(log_{2}p(x) + \frac{1}{ln_{2}}+\lambda) = 0##

I am unsure what to do with the summation signs, and I am also unsure how to proceed from here. Can I please have some help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The partials with respect to ##\lambda## should recover your constraint functions since the ##\lambda## dependent terms in your Lagrangian are only ##\lambda## times your constraint functions. Also consider using an index:

Sample space is ##\{ x_1, x_2, \cdots x_d\}## and ##p_k = p(x_k)##

L(p_k, \lambda) = -\sum_{k} p_k \log_2(p_k) - \lambda C(p_k)
with ##C## your constraint function ##C(p_k) = p_1+p_2+\ldots +p_d - 1## and normalized probabilities equate to ##C=0##.

\frac{\partial}{\partial p_k} L =\frac{1}{\ln(2)} -\log_2(p_k) -\lambda \doteq 0
\frac{\partial}{\partial \lambda} L = C(p_k) \doteq 0
(using ##\doteq## to indicate application of a constraint rather than an a priori identity.)
This is your ##d+1## equation on your ##d+1## free variables ##(p_1, p_2, \ldots ,p_d, \lambda)##.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top