Inverse gamma distribution & simulated annealing problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the challenges of sampling an inverse gamma distribution (IG) scaled by a temperature variable, T, within a simulated annealing framework. The user defines the inverse gamma distribution as IG(x|a,b) = k * x^(-a-1) * exp(-b/x) and explores the implications of scaling it to (IG(x|a,b))^(1/T). The critical issue arises when the parameters a' and b' derived from the scaling become invalid for temperatures T > a + 1, leading to negative values for a'. The conversation highlights the necessity of maintaining positive parameters for valid distributions and contrasts this with the behavior of the gamma distribution under similar scaling.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of inverse gamma distribution and its properties
  • Familiarity with simulated annealing techniques
  • Knowledge of gamma distribution and its parameterization
  • Basic concepts of Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of scaling probability density functions (pdf) in statistical distributions
  • Study the relationship between inverse gamma and gamma distributions in detail
  • Explore advanced topics in simulated annealing and its applications in MCMC
  • Investigate methods to ensure parameter validity in statistical distributions
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data scientists, and researchers involved in probabilistic modeling, particularly those working with inverse gamma distributions and simulated annealing techniques.

tbishop
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I've hit a problem trying to sample an inverse gamma distribution, 'scaled' using a temperature variable, T. If my distribution is defined as (where the normalising constant k=(b^a)/Gamma(a) ):
IG(x|a,b) = k * x^(-a-1) * exp(-b/x)
then the scaled version is
(IG(x|a,b))^(1/T) = k^(1/T) * x^(-(-a+1)/T) * exp(-b/(Tx)).
which I want to sample as part of a simulated annealing procedure.

If I am not mistaken, this is also proportional to a new IG distribution, IG(x|a',b')
where a'+1 = (a+1)/T and b'=b/T. Hence a' = (a+1-T)/T.
The problem is however, that a' and b' should be strictly > 0 for the distribution to be valid. Thus for temperatures T>a+1, a' becomes negative and the samples can't be drawn.
(However I can still evaluate the IG pdf for a'<0... so I'm not sure
why the condition is strictly necessary? Is it just a physical
interpretation?)

I can do the sampling for X~IG(a',b') by transformation of a Gamma variate
G(x|a,b)=k * x^(a-1) exp(-bx)
by drawing Y~G(a',b') and letting X=1/Y.

Now the strange thing is if I apply the same temperature scaling to the Gamma distribution, I get the new transformation to a Gamma distribution with
a' = (a-1+T)/T
which will always be positive for all T>=1 if a>0. As whether I'm working with x or 1/x (and therefore working with the IG or Gamma) should be purely a matter of convenience, and not depend on which definition I start from, there is something at odds here...

I've probably missed something obvious but I can't think what it is. Any suggestions appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am somewhat unclear as to why you'd like to scale the pdf in the way you described. The usual approach is to scale the random variable itself, say Y = sX for a scaling constant s > 0; and if X ~ Gamma(a, b) then Y ~ Gamma(a, sb).

In the usual meaning of "scaling," parameter a is not affected because it is not a scaling parameter -- parameter b is.
 
I am somewhat unclear as to why you'd like to scale the pdf in the way you described. The usual approach is to scale the random variable itself, say Y = sX for a scaling constant s > 0; and if X ~ Gamma(a, b) then Y ~ Gamma(a, sb).

In the usual meaning of "scaling," parameter a is not affected because it is not a scaling parameter -- parameter b is.

I'm not referring to this normal type of "scaling", I'm referring to raising the whole distribution to a power 1/T which effectively "broadens" the distribution. In the case of a Gaussian, the effect is indeed simply to increase the variance. The reason I want to do this is to increase convergence rates in MCMC, by searching the space faster using http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SimulatedAnnealing.html" )
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K