- #1
nizi
- 17
- 1
This time I target the following two-class Bayesian logistic regression as statistical models.
$$y_n \sim \mathrm{Bernoulli}(q_n)$$
$$q_n = \sigma (\beta_0 + x_n \beta_1)$$
where ##n## is the index of the data and ##\sigma## is the logistic function.
Since I assume ##\beta_0 + x_n \beta_1## as the linear predictor (the independent variable of the logistic activation function), I have two parameters ##\beta_0## and ##\beta_1##, and I want to express that their prior distributions independently follow a non-regular uniform distribution, the support of which each probability density function is the set of real numbers.
Is it appropriate to write
$$\beta_0, \beta_1 \sim \mathrm{Uniform}(-\infty, \infty), i.i.d.$$
in this case?
I'm particularly concerned about the appropriateness of writing i.i.d.
If there is a more appropriate way to express this, please let me know.
$$y_n \sim \mathrm{Bernoulli}(q_n)$$
$$q_n = \sigma (\beta_0 + x_n \beta_1)$$
where ##n## is the index of the data and ##\sigma## is the logistic function.
Since I assume ##\beta_0 + x_n \beta_1## as the linear predictor (the independent variable of the logistic activation function), I have two parameters ##\beta_0## and ##\beta_1##, and I want to express that their prior distributions independently follow a non-regular uniform distribution, the support of which each probability density function is the set of real numbers.
Is it appropriate to write
$$\beta_0, \beta_1 \sim \mathrm{Uniform}(-\infty, \infty), i.i.d.$$
in this case?
I'm particularly concerned about the appropriateness of writing i.i.d.
If there is a more appropriate way to express this, please let me know.
Last edited: