Deriving individual probability from conditional probability
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Very simple question - say you have discrete variables $a in S$ and $x in Q$, where $S$ and $Q$ are finite sets. Say also you know the value of $P(a|x)$ for all $S$ and $Q$. How do you derive $P(a)$ for all $a in S$? I'm thinking the formula is something like the following:
$P(a) = frac{sum_{x in Q}P(a|x)}{|Q|}$
Is this correct? What would the formula be if $Q$ were continuous?
probability conditional-probability
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Very simple question - say you have discrete variables $a in S$ and $x in Q$, where $S$ and $Q$ are finite sets. Say also you know the value of $P(a|x)$ for all $S$ and $Q$. How do you derive $P(a)$ for all $a in S$? I'm thinking the formula is something like the following:
$P(a) = frac{sum_{x in Q}P(a|x)}{|Q|}$
Is this correct? What would the formula be if $Q$ were continuous?
probability conditional-probability
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
1
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Very simple question - say you have discrete variables $a in S$ and $x in Q$, where $S$ and $Q$ are finite sets. Say also you know the value of $P(a|x)$ for all $S$ and $Q$. How do you derive $P(a)$ for all $a in S$? I'm thinking the formula is something like the following:
$P(a) = frac{sum_{x in Q}P(a|x)}{|Q|}$
Is this correct? What would the formula be if $Q$ were continuous?
probability conditional-probability
Very simple question - say you have discrete variables $a in S$ and $x in Q$, where $S$ and $Q$ are finite sets. Say also you know the value of $P(a|x)$ for all $S$ and $Q$. How do you derive $P(a)$ for all $a in S$? I'm thinking the formula is something like the following:
$P(a) = frac{sum_{x in Q}P(a|x)}{|Q|}$
Is this correct? What would the formula be if $Q$ were continuous?
probability conditional-probability
probability conditional-probability
asked Nov 17 at 0:10
ahelwer
1084
1084
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
1
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19
add a comment |
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
1
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
1
1
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If $A$ and $X$ are random variables and we know $X$ takes values in a discrete set $mathcal{Q}$ then for any real number $a$ we have by the law of total probability:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]P[X=x]} quad (1) $$
In the special case when $mathcal{Q}$ is a finite set with $|mathcal{Q}|$ elements, and when $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $|mathcal{Q}|$, then $P[X=x] = frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$ for all $x in mathcal{Q}$ and the above formula (1) reduces to:
$$ P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$$
which is similar in form to your conjectured formula.
If $X$ is a continuous random variable with PDF $f_X(x)$ then the law of total probability formula (1) is changed to:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[A=a|X=x]f_X(x)dx} $$
Note also that we can only take probabilities of events. So if $Y$ is a random variable, example events are ${Yleq 12}$ or ${Y=8}$ and we can speak of $P[Yleq 12]$ (the probability that $Y$ is less than or equal to 12) and $P[Y=8]$ (the probability that $Y$ is 8) but it makes no sense to speak of $P[Y]$ (the probability that $Y$ is...what???).
So I do not like your notation $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ since (i) I do not know if $a$ is supposed to be a random variable or a parameter; (ii) $a$ certainly is not an event so $P[a]$ makes no sense (the probability that $a$ is...what???)
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If $A$ and $X$ are random variables and we know $X$ takes values in a discrete set $mathcal{Q}$ then for any real number $a$ we have by the law of total probability:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]P[X=x]} quad (1) $$
In the special case when $mathcal{Q}$ is a finite set with $|mathcal{Q}|$ elements, and when $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $|mathcal{Q}|$, then $P[X=x] = frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$ for all $x in mathcal{Q}$ and the above formula (1) reduces to:
$$ P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$$
which is similar in form to your conjectured formula.
If $X$ is a continuous random variable with PDF $f_X(x)$ then the law of total probability formula (1) is changed to:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[A=a|X=x]f_X(x)dx} $$
Note also that we can only take probabilities of events. So if $Y$ is a random variable, example events are ${Yleq 12}$ or ${Y=8}$ and we can speak of $P[Yleq 12]$ (the probability that $Y$ is less than or equal to 12) and $P[Y=8]$ (the probability that $Y$ is 8) but it makes no sense to speak of $P[Y]$ (the probability that $Y$ is...what???).
So I do not like your notation $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ since (i) I do not know if $a$ is supposed to be a random variable or a parameter; (ii) $a$ certainly is not an event so $P[a]$ makes no sense (the probability that $a$ is...what???)
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If $A$ and $X$ are random variables and we know $X$ takes values in a discrete set $mathcal{Q}$ then for any real number $a$ we have by the law of total probability:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]P[X=x]} quad (1) $$
In the special case when $mathcal{Q}$ is a finite set with $|mathcal{Q}|$ elements, and when $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $|mathcal{Q}|$, then $P[X=x] = frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$ for all $x in mathcal{Q}$ and the above formula (1) reduces to:
$$ P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$$
which is similar in form to your conjectured formula.
If $X$ is a continuous random variable with PDF $f_X(x)$ then the law of total probability formula (1) is changed to:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[A=a|X=x]f_X(x)dx} $$
Note also that we can only take probabilities of events. So if $Y$ is a random variable, example events are ${Yleq 12}$ or ${Y=8}$ and we can speak of $P[Yleq 12]$ (the probability that $Y$ is less than or equal to 12) and $P[Y=8]$ (the probability that $Y$ is 8) but it makes no sense to speak of $P[Y]$ (the probability that $Y$ is...what???).
So I do not like your notation $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ since (i) I do not know if $a$ is supposed to be a random variable or a parameter; (ii) $a$ certainly is not an event so $P[a]$ makes no sense (the probability that $a$ is...what???)
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If $A$ and $X$ are random variables and we know $X$ takes values in a discrete set $mathcal{Q}$ then for any real number $a$ we have by the law of total probability:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]P[X=x]} quad (1) $$
In the special case when $mathcal{Q}$ is a finite set with $|mathcal{Q}|$ elements, and when $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $|mathcal{Q}|$, then $P[X=x] = frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$ for all $x in mathcal{Q}$ and the above formula (1) reduces to:
$$ P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$$
which is similar in form to your conjectured formula.
If $X$ is a continuous random variable with PDF $f_X(x)$ then the law of total probability formula (1) is changed to:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[A=a|X=x]f_X(x)dx} $$
Note also that we can only take probabilities of events. So if $Y$ is a random variable, example events are ${Yleq 12}$ or ${Y=8}$ and we can speak of $P[Yleq 12]$ (the probability that $Y$ is less than or equal to 12) and $P[Y=8]$ (the probability that $Y$ is 8) but it makes no sense to speak of $P[Y]$ (the probability that $Y$ is...what???).
So I do not like your notation $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ since (i) I do not know if $a$ is supposed to be a random variable or a parameter; (ii) $a$ certainly is not an event so $P[a]$ makes no sense (the probability that $a$ is...what???)
If $A$ and $X$ are random variables and we know $X$ takes values in a discrete set $mathcal{Q}$ then for any real number $a$ we have by the law of total probability:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]P[X=x]} quad (1) $$
In the special case when $mathcal{Q}$ is a finite set with $|mathcal{Q}|$ elements, and when $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $|mathcal{Q}|$, then $P[X=x] = frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$ for all $x in mathcal{Q}$ and the above formula (1) reduces to:
$$ P[A=a] = sum_{x in mathcal{Q}} P[A=a|X=x]frac{1}{|mathcal{Q}|}$$
which is similar in form to your conjectured formula.
If $X$ is a continuous random variable with PDF $f_X(x)$ then the law of total probability formula (1) is changed to:
$$ boxed{P[A=a] = int_{-infty}^{infty} P[A=a|X=x]f_X(x)dx} $$
Note also that we can only take probabilities of events. So if $Y$ is a random variable, example events are ${Yleq 12}$ or ${Y=8}$ and we can speak of $P[Yleq 12]$ (the probability that $Y$ is less than or equal to 12) and $P[Y=8]$ (the probability that $Y$ is 8) but it makes no sense to speak of $P[Y]$ (the probability that $Y$ is...what???).
So I do not like your notation $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ since (i) I do not know if $a$ is supposed to be a random variable or a parameter; (ii) $a$ certainly is not an event so $P[a]$ makes no sense (the probability that $a$ is...what???)
edited Nov 17 at 1:16
answered Nov 17 at 1:10
Michael
13.2k11325
13.2k11325
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
add a comment |
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
Brilliant! Thank you for taking the time to decode my question, especially relating it to the special case where $X$ takes values equally likely over all elements of $Q$. To clarify, $a in S$ were possible outcomes given some precondition $x in Q$ which changed the probabilities of outcomes $a in S$. Thank you for introducing this improved notation.
– ahelwer
Nov 17 at 1:29
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3001808%2fderiving-individual-probability-from-conditional-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What is $|Q|$? If it is the cardinality of $Q$ then the equation is surely false.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Nov 17 at 0:39
1
I assume by $P[a]$ and $P[a|x]$ you really mean $P[A=a]$ and $P[A=a|X=x]$ for some random variables $A, X$ and some particular parameters $a,x$.
– Michael
Nov 17 at 1:19