Multiple events and using bayes theorem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the application of Bayes' theorem to calculate the conditional probability P(H|J, G, L) using four discrete random variables. The initial attempt to express P(H|J, G, L) was corrected, highlighting that P(J, G, L|H) P(H) does not equal P(H|J, G, L). Instead, the correct formulation involves using the joint probability P(H, J, G, L) and the marginal probability P(J, G, L). The user seeks to express P(H|J, G, L) in terms of known distributions and conditional independence assumptions, but is advised that additional information is needed to compute P(J, G, L) without conditioning on H. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationships between these probabilities to derive the desired conditional probability accurately.
skyflashings
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I am not sure if I am doing this correctly, so please check my attempt:

I have four discrete random variables: G, H, J, L

Say, I want to find P(H|J, G, L).

Then can I write as P(H|J, G, L) = P(J, G, L|H)*P(H) = P(J|G, L, H)*P(G|L, H)*P(L|H)*P(H)

Are those equivalent? I can't find an example exactly like this one; I just want to make sure that it works this way. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
skyflashings said:
Then can I write as P(H|J, G, L) = P(J, G, L|H)*P(H)

No. P(J,G,L | H) P(H) is equal to P(H,J,G,L), which is not the same as P(H|J,G,L)
P(H| J \cap G \cap L) = \frac{ P(H \cap J \cap G \cap L)}{P( J \cap G \cap L)}

There are various ways to rewrite the right hand side.

For example, the numerator can be written as:

P( H \cap J \cap G \cap L) = P(H | J \cap G \cap L) P(J \cap G \cap L)
= P(H| J \cap G \cap L) P(J | G \cap L) P(G \cap L)
= P(H| J \cap G \cap L) P(J | G \cap L) P(G | L) P(L)

which is similar to what you had in mind. You could also write it as you did, with P(H) as the last factor.
 
Last edited:
Ok, I see how it unfolds now.

One of the reasons I wanted to get my final form is that I only have a distribution for P(H), P(J|H), P(G|L,H), and P(L|H) and there is a conditional independence assumption that P(J|H)=P(J|G,L,H).

So, I need to find P(H|J, G, L) in terms of those.

If I were to follow your steps to solve for P(H|J, G, L), would it look something like:

P(H|J, G, L) = P(H, J, G, L) / ((P(H|J, G, L)*P(J|G, L)*P(G|L)*P(L))

I'm not sure how to proceed at that point..

Thanks for the help, I hope I can wrap my head around this.
 
I think you need more information to calculate P(H| J, G, L). You need to be able to calculate P(J,G,L) without the condition that the event H is true. If you know the problem has an answer, think about whether there is other known information.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...

Similar threads

Back
Top