Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Show that acceptance of the likelihood principle implies acceptance of the sufficiency and conditionality principles.

Short Answer

Expert verified
The Likelihood Principle implies both the Sufficiency and Conditionality Principles by focusing on equivalent likelihoods for inference.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Likelihood Principle

The Likelihood Principle states that all the information about a statistical model provided by a sample is contained in the likelihood function. That means if two samples give equivalent likelihood functions, they provide the same evidence about the parameter of interest, regardless of the nature of the experiments.
02

Defining the Sufficiency Principle

The Sufficiency Principle highlights that if a statistic is sufficient for a parameter in a data model, then no other statistic should provide any additional information about that parameter. A statistic is sufficient if the likelihood depends only on that statistic and the parameter.
03

Applying the Likelihood Principle to Sufficiency

According to the Likelihood Principle, two likelihoods that are equivalent provide the same informational content. Thus, if a statistic is sufficient, any rearrangement of data that preserves this likelihood does not alter the evidence about the parameter, satisfying the Sufficiency Principle. That is, the likelihood containing the sufficient statistic contains all relevant information.
04

Understanding the Conditionality Principle

The Conditionality Principle states that if an experiment consists of several trials, with one trial being selected randomly, the parameter estimation should be based only on the data from the selected trial, ignoring the others.
05

Application of the Likelihood Principle to Conditionality

By the Likelihood Principle, since the likelihood function accurately reflects the information about parameters, any decision rule must be based on the condition that leads to the same likelihood function. For randomly chosen trials, only the data from that particular trial affects the likelihood, aligning with the Conditionality Principle. Thus, the information needed for inference is conditional on that particular trial's data.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Sufficiency Principle
The Sufficiency Principle revolves around the idea that certain statistics within a dataset can encapsulate all necessary information about a parameter. Imagine you have a huge pool of data, all pointing toward some unknown parameter. If you can sum up all this data's essence using one neat statistic, that's a sufficient statistic. This means no other statistic should add further clarity about the parameter if the data model is correctly specified.

Why is this important? Think of statistics as a way to simplify complex data. If you find a sufficient statistic, you've managed to compress all the vital information into a smaller, more digestible format, without losing any of the substance. In this way, you're equipped with all the insights you need about the parameter.
  • A sufficient statistic encapsulates all necessary information from the sample.
  • If your data model centers around a sufficient statistic, you've hit a sweet spot in data reduction.
  • Sufficient statistics make analysis more efficient and concise.
Conditionality Principle
The Conditionality Principle suggests a focused approach in the landscape of statistical inference. Imagine running several trials within an experiment. This principle tells us to base decisions and inferences solely on the data from the specific trial conducted, while ignoring others. It is an elegant way to respect the randomness of having chosen one trial over others.

Think of this principle as recognizing and respecting the uniqueness of your current situation. Each trial you conduct might be from a different framework or setup. The data specifically from your chosen trial carries the most relevant information about what you're trying to learn.
  • Your decision-making relies on the specific, selected trial.
  • You disregard other potential data that was not actually observed.
  • This encourages focusing on actual, observed information under the given circumstances.
Likelihood Function
The likelihood function is the star in our statistical data analysis show. It tells us how probable our observed data is, given a set of parameter values. Essentially, it centers around a probability model and illuminates how different parameter values impact the probability of observing our data.

When you consider a likelihood function, think of it as shining a light on how well different "guesses" (parameter values) explain your data. A higher likelihood indicates a better parameter value for your observed data.
  • It maps our data onto potential parameter values.
  • Higher likelihood values point to better explanations for the data.
  • It is a crucial tool for understanding and modeling statistical phenomena.
This function gives the essential blueprint in inferring about parameters and ensures precise and well-informed statistical conclusions.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Show that the Gibbs sampler with \(k>2\) components updated in order $$ 1, \ldots, k, 1, \ldots, k, 1, \ldots, k, \ldots $$ is not reversible. Are samplers updated in order \(1, \ldots, k, k-1, \ldots, 1,2, \ldots\), or in a random order reversible?

A forensic laboratory assesses if the DNA profile from a specimen found at a crime scene matches the DNA profile of a suspect. The technology is not perfect, as there is a (small) probability \(\rho\) that a match oocurs by chance even if the suspect was not present at the scene, and a (larger) probability \(\gamma\) that a match is reported even if the profiles are different; this can arise due to laboratory error such as cross-contamination or accidental switching of profiles. (a) Let \(R, S\), and \(M\) denotes the events that a match is reported, that the specimen does indeed come from the suspect, and that there is a match between the profiles, and suppose that $$ \operatorname{Pr}(R \mid M \cap S)=\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid M \cap \bar{S})=\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid M)=1, \operatorname{Pr}(\bar{M} \mid S)=0, \operatorname{Pr}(R \mid S)=1 $$ Show that the posterior odds of the profiles matching, given that a match has been reported, depend on $$ \frac{\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid S)}{\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid \bar{S})}=\frac{\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid M \cap S) \operatorname{Pr}(M \mid S)+\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid \bar{M} \cap S) \operatorname{Pr}(\bar{M} \mid S)}{\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid M \cap \bar{S}) \operatorname{Pr}(M \mid \bar{S})+\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid \bar{M} \cap \bar{S}) \operatorname{Pr}(\bar{M} \mid \bar{S})} $$ and establish that this equals \(\\{\rho+\gamma(1-\rho)\\}^{-1}\) (b) Tabulate \(\operatorname{Pr}(R \mid S) / \operatorname{Pr}(R \mid \bar{S})\) when \(\rho=0,10^{-9}, 10^{-6}, 10^{-3}\) and \(\gamma=0,10^{-4}\), \(10^{-3}, 10^{-2}\) (c) At what level of posterior odds would you be willing to convict the suspect, if the only evidence against them was the DNA analysis, and you should only convict if convinced of their guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt'? Would your chosen odds level depend on the likely sentence, if they are found guilty? How does your answer depend on the prior odds of the profiles matching, \(\operatorname{Pr}(S) / \operatorname{Pr}(\bar{S}) ?\)

Two independent samples \(Y_{1}, \ldots, Y_{n} \stackrel{\text { iid }}{\sim} N\left(\mu, \sigma^{2}\right)\) and \(X_{1}, \ldots, X_{m} \stackrel{\text { iid }}{\sim} N\left(\mu, c \sigma^{2}\right)\) are available, where \(c>0\) is known. Find posterior densities for \(\mu\) and \(\sigma\) based on prior \(\pi(\mu, \sigma) \propto 1 / \sigma\).

Show that the acceptance probability for a move from \(u\) to \(u^{\prime}\) when random walk Metropolis sampling is applied to a transformation \(v=v(u)\) of \(u\) is $$ \min \left\\{1, \frac{\pi\left(u^{\prime}\right)|d v / d u|}{\pi(u)\left|d v^{\prime} / d u^{\prime}\right|}\right\\} $$ Hence verify the form of \(q\left(u \mid u^{\prime}\right) / q\left(u^{\prime} \mid u\right)\) given in Example 11.24. Find the acceptance probability when a component of \(u\) takes values in \((a, b)\), and a random walk is proposed for \(v=\log \\{(u-a) /(b-u)\\}\).

Show that the \((1-2 \alpha)\) HPD credible interval for a continuous unimodal posterior density \(\pi(\theta \mid y)\) is the shortest credible interval with level \((1-2 \alpha)\).

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free