mirror of
https://github.com/asimonson1125/Implementations-of-Probability-Theory.git
synced 2026-02-25 06:09:50 -06:00
339 lines
21 KiB
TeX
339 lines
21 KiB
TeX
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
|
|
\usepackage{blindtext}
|
|
\usepackage{hyperref}
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath}
|
|
\usepackage{amssymb}
|
|
\usepackage{tikz}
|
|
\usepackage[a4paper, total={6in, 10in}]{geometry}
|
|
\usepackage{setspace}
|
|
\setstretch{1.25}
|
|
\hyphenpenalty 1000
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
\begin{titlepage}
|
|
\begin{center}
|
|
|
|
\vspace*{5cm}
|
|
\Large{\textbf{Implementations of Probability Theory}}\\
|
|
|
|
\rule{14cm}{0.05cm}\\ \vspace{.25cm}
|
|
|
|
\Large{Independent Study Report}\\
|
|
\large{Andrew Simonson}
|
|
|
|
\vspace*{\fill}
|
|
\large{Compiled on: \today}\\
|
|
|
|
\end{center}
|
|
\end{titlepage}
|
|
|
|
\newpage
|
|
% Table of Contents
|
|
% \large{Table of Contents}
|
|
\tableofcontents
|
|
\addtocontents{toc}{~\hfill\textbf{Page}\par}
|
|
|
|
\newpage
|
|
% Begin report
|
|
\section{Objective}
|
|
The educational focus of Implementations of Probability Theory surrounds the application of data
|
|
models that produce non-deterministic insights through probabilistic methodology. By pursuing this
|
|
study I hope to gain a deeper understanding of how to apply data in risk calculation for mitigation
|
|
scenarios as they appear in real life, rather than the experimental lab conditions that enable algorithmic
|
|
certainty.
|
|
|
|
In contrast to the path of black-box artificial intelligence and algorithms taught in \textbf{CSCI 335: Machine Learning}, this study is tailored to methods
|
|
designed to produce confidence levels for uncertain events using certain terms, leveraging logical,
|
|
traceable, and definite, calculations. Current course offerings in the realm of data science focus largely on
|
|
the storing and management of data, and it is noted that the cluster of data science was until very recently
|
|
under the branding of data management. Implementations of Probability Theory is intended to extend
|
|
learnings in previous courses, notably \textbf{CSCI 420: Principles of Data Mining}, for more advanced algorithms
|
|
used at the intersection of data and computing after the preprocessing stage.
|
|
|
|
After beginning this study the intended deliverable outline was determined to be technically implausible and has been replaced with
|
|
demonstrations of applied algorithms. Taking inspiration from the retinal mosaic as displayed in \textbf{CSCI 431: Intro to Computer Vision}
|
|
and discussion in \textbf{IGME 589: Computational Creativity and Algorithmic Art} on the appearance and nature of randomness in graphics, I hope to create
|
|
a program that can determine the liklihood that randomly distributed colors on a hexagonal grid appear as they do in an image.
|
|
|
|
\newpage
|
|
\section{Units}
|
|
\rule{14cm}{0.05cm}
|
|
\subsection{Unit 1: Statistics Review}
|
|
To ensure a strong statistical foundation for the future learnings in probabilistic models,
|
|
the first objective was to create a document outlining and defining key topics that are
|
|
prerequisites for probabilities in statistics or for understanding generic analytical models.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Random Variables}
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item \textbf{Discrete Random Variables - }values are selected by chance from a countable (including countably infinite) list of distinct values
|
|
\item \textbf{Continuous Random Variables - }values are selected by chance with an uncountable number of values within its range
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Sample Space}
|
|
A sample space is the set of all possible outcomes of an instance. For a six-sided dice roll event,
|
|
the die may land with 1 through 6 dots facing upwards, hence:
|
|
\[S = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] \quad\text{where }S\text{ is the sample space}\]
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Probability Axioms}
|
|
There are three probability axioms:
|
|
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item \textbf{Non-negativity}:
|
|
\[
|
|
P(A) \geq 0 \quad \text{for any event }A, \ P(A) \in \mathbb{R}
|
|
\]
|
|
No event can be less likely to occur than an impossible event ( \(P(A) = 0\) ). P(A) is a real number.
|
|
Paired with axiom 2 we can also conclude that \(P(A) \leq 1\).
|
|
|
|
\item \textbf{Normalization}:
|
|
\[
|
|
P(S) = 1\quad\text{where }S\text{ is the sample space}
|
|
\]
|
|
\textbf{Unit Measure - } All event probabilities in a sample space add up to 1. In essence, there is a 100\%
|
|
chance that one of the events in the sample space will occur.
|
|
|
|
\item \textbf{Additivity}:
|
|
\[
|
|
P(A \cup B) = P(A) + P(B) \quad \text{if } A \cap B = \emptyset
|
|
\]
|
|
A union between events that are mutually exclusive (events that cannot both happen for an instance) has a
|
|
probability that is the sum of the associated event probabilities.
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Expectations and Deviation}
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item \textbf{Expectation - }The weighted average of the probabilities in the sample space
|
|
\[\sum_{}^{S}{P(A) * A} = E \quad\text{where }E\text{ is the expected value}\]
|
|
\item \textbf{Variance - }The spread of possible values for a random variable, calculated as:
|
|
\[\sigma^{2}=\frac{\sum(X - \mu)^{2}}{N}\]
|
|
Where \(N\) is the population size, \(\mu\) is the population average, and \(X\) is each value in the population.\\
|
|
For samples, variance is calculated with \textbf{Bessel's Correction}, which increases the variance to avoid overfitting the sample:
|
|
\[s^{2}=\frac{\sum(X - \bar{x})^{2}}{n - 1}\]
|
|
\item \textbf{Standard Deviation - }The square root of the variance, giving a measure of the average distance of each data point from the mean in the same units as the data.
|
|
\[\sigma = \sqrt{V}\quad\text{where variance is }V\]
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Probability Functions}
|
|
Probability Functions map the likelihood of random variables to be a specific value.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection*{Probability Mass Functions}
|
|
Probability Mass Functions (PMFs) map discrete random variables.
|
|
For example, a six-sided die roll creates a uniform random PMF:
|
|
\begin{equation*}
|
|
P(A) =
|
|
\begin{cases}
|
|
1/6\qquad\text{if }&X=1\\
|
|
1/6&X=2\\
|
|
1/6&X=3\\
|
|
1/6&X=4\\
|
|
1/6&X=5\\
|
|
1/6&X=6\\
|
|
\end{cases}
|
|
\end{equation*}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection*{Probability Density Functions}
|
|
Probability Density Functions (PDFs) map continuous random variables.
|
|
For example, this is a PDF where things happen.
|
|
\begin{equation*}
|
|
P(A) =
|
|
\begin{cases}
|
|
X\qquad\qquad\text{if }&0\leq X\leq .5\\
|
|
-X+1&.5<X\leq 1\\
|
|
0&otherwise
|
|
\end{cases}
|
|
\end{equation*}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Limit Theorems}
|
|
\subsubsection*{Law of Large Numbers}
|
|
The Law of Large Numbers states that as the number of independent random samples increases, the average of the samples'
|
|
means will approach the true mean of the population.
|
|
\[\text{true average}\approx \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} X_{i} \qquad\text{as }n \rightarrow \infty\]
|
|
\subsubsection*{Central Limit Theorem}
|
|
The Central Limit Theorem states that the sampling distribution of a sample mean is a normal distribution even when the
|
|
population distribution is not normal.
|
|
\[
|
|
\frac{\sqrt{n} \left( \bar{X}_n - \mu \right)}{\sigma} \xrightarrow{d} N(0, 1)
|
|
\]
|
|
Where \(X_i\) is the sample mean, \(N(0, 1)\) is a standard normal distribution, and \(\bar{X}_n = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i\).\\
|
|
This is a challenging to understand solely as an equation. As an example, take a sample of two six-sided dice rolls and average their numbers.
|
|
The more sample averages taken, the more they will resemble a normal distribution where the majority of samples average around 3.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Confidence}
|
|
Confidence is described using a confidence interval, which is a range of values that the true value is expected to be in, and its associated confidence level,
|
|
which is a probability (expressed as a percentage) that the true value is in the confidence interval.
|
|
|
|
It is important to note that confidence levels, such as 95\%, do not indicate that the real value is within 5\% of the point estimate. The confidence level expresses
|
|
the probability that the real value is in the range provided by the confidence interval.
|
|
|
|
At the highest level, calculating confidence intervals is simply the observed statistic (generally the mean) plus or minus the standard error.
|
|
|
|
To calculate standard error, kys.
|
|
|
|
% Confidence intervals can be calculated with z-tests, t-tests. Go into parametric vs non-parametric
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Statistical Inference}
|
|
Statistical Inference is any data analysis to draw conclusions from a sample to make assertions about the population.
|
|
Methods include estimation via averages and confidence intervals, and hypothesis testing, which attempts to invalidate (never \textit{validate}) a hypothesis.
|
|
|
|
\newpage
|
|
\subsection{Unit 2: Probabilistic Theories and Epistemology}
|
|
When developing probabilistic models it is vital to use domain expertise to expose the product to the full range of external variables that would be expected
|
|
of a model applied to the real world. Without an appropriate understanding of both the limitations in research procedures and the true value of the data collected,
|
|
the integrity of the model becomes inherently compromised.
|
|
|
|
As data scientists, we are uniquely at risk of falling for this trap because it is hard to fully grasp domain expertise when the nature of data science
|
|
in a business setting frequently means consulting for many separate projects with a collectively massive scope. Of equal consideration, it is also easy
|
|
to assume that the sophistication of our tools overrides imperfections in the data, in spite of mantras like 'Garbage In, Garbage Out'.
|
|
|
|
In this unit I explored some common fallacies and assumptions held by analysts who may not fully grasp the content that they work with,
|
|
nor the problems they intend to solve. This required extensive research that I found was best digested in the form of books whose chapters chronicle multiple
|
|
examples of a given principle. As such, the reading was not confined to just the timeslot designated for this unit. Research started during the months leading up
|
|
to the start of the semester\footnote{Only research during the semester was logged in the timesheet} and have continued through the independent study. This
|
|
structure was particularly helpful to pull me back and gain perspective of what my goal was when I was knee-deep in feature construction and model formulation.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Moral Hazards and The Bob Rubin Trade}
|
|
Picking pennies in front of a steamroller.
|
|
When studying the effectiveness of a model the scope of review must capture the entire range of the sample space. Discarding black swans that don't impact
|
|
the client does not mean the results will not reflect on the client for an oversight. There is therefore a question of obligation for data scientists to include
|
|
flags for significant events in reality that do not effect the proposed course of action to the client.
|
|
|
|
The 2009 recession, attributed to the collapse of the housing market bubble, is the most common example of a moral hazard because the displacement of risk from
|
|
banks who were federally required to give subprime loans to the taxpayer meant that banks could profit from subprime loans but would not be harmed when the inevitable
|
|
occurred. In popular media, the housing bubble bursting is attributed to the banks where those in the industry passed off the event as something that nobody could
|
|
have foreseen\footnote{For instance, in the 2015 movie \textit{The Big Short}, only a few savvy traders who bothered to look into the details find that banks had,
|
|
in their ignorance, built the bundled mortgages on an unstable foundation.}. In reality, banks only ignored a probablistic eventuality because their models did not
|
|
need to account for such an event.
|
|
|
|
Most emphasize the problems with risk transferrence when creating models. For this study's purposes, the important learning is that probablistic models should not
|
|
drop evaluations as soon as an event leaves the scope of the immediate client.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Ignoring Improbable Outliers with Outsized Impact}
|
|
In machine learning it is common for algorithms to drop the most extreme (or a random selection of) datapoints to avoid overfitting and errors in data collection.
|
|
One issue with the current implementation of this procedure is that it is often done blindly, ignorant of information that these outliers may relay. For instance,
|
|
in a selection of 300 water samples from a stream, all but a few show a normal amount of oxygen in the stream. A citizen scientist may discount the remaining pockets
|
|
as a statistical implausibility that is most likely indicative of a failure in sample testing and drop the most extreme 5\% of datapoints.
|
|
However, if these few pockets show a complete disruption of the dissolution process, the vast majority of aquatic life in the stream will eventually pass through
|
|
these pockets without oxygen and die, resulting in an outsized impact from just a few sources.
|
|
|
|
Nassim Taleb in \textit{Fooled By Randomness} describes this event with an analogy to Russian Roulette: If there was a 5/6 chance of winning a million dollars and a
|
|
1/6 chance of killing yourself, many people would at least hesitate before pulling the trigger. But what if the barrel is 10,000 rounds and it was only a
|
|
1/10,000 chance of harm? In this case, many less-than-rational actors use the game repeatedly to acquire wealth indefinitely, forgetting or even outright ignorant
|
|
that eventually the unlikely, or, as the actor would see it, the unthinkable, happens and all of the gains are completely negated.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Fooled By Randomness}
|
|
May justify its own subsection since the others acknowledge small probabilities whereas this is outright randomness.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Lindy Effect}
|
|
"For the perishable, every additional day in its life translates into a shorter additional life expectancy.
|
|
For the nonperishable, every additional day may imply a longer life expectancy."
|
|
A tool that is proven is more likely to stand the test of time than a new tool replacing it since it is unproven.
|
|
"The robustness of an item is proportional to its life!"
|
|
|
|
"Inaccurate science\ldots is constantly being published. The Lindy-conscious consumer of scientific data will take seriously only
|
|
information that has held up over a period of time."\footnote{\url{https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/17/style/lindy.html}}
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Decision Theory}
|
|
Decision theory is the study of how people make decisions with uncertain information. There are two main branches of decision theory:
|
|
\subsubsection*{Normative/Rational Decision Theory}
|
|
This branch studies how people \textit{should} make decisions. In problems with other actors, as in game theory, it is assumed that all other actors will also
|
|
act with perfect rationality, allowing for precise calculation of the actions of all of the others and their expected utility to the agent.
|
|
\subsubsection*{Descriptive Decision Theory}
|
|
This branch studies how people actually make decisions which includes factors such as psychological and emotional biases.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Info Gap Decisions}
|
|
In info gap decision theory there is not enough information to assign probabilities to events and the goal is to select a course of action that is robust in the
|
|
face of uncertainty. Where decision theory can predict expectations in irrationality to determine expected values, info gap decisions approximate the range of
|
|
probabilities and weight them to estimate expected value. In essence, it applies probabilities to probabilities, adding an additional layer to insulate calculations
|
|
from a lack of data or lack of understanding of a topic.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Methodology Considerations}
|
|
Given I have taken 10134023 instances of the last 40 years, all of which Obama has been alive, I can say with a high degree of certainty that Obama is immortal.
|
|
|
|
An event never occurring in history does not discount its possiblity of occurring in the future. Similarly, events that may have been impossible in the past
|
|
are not necessarily impossible in the future.
|
|
Also, psychology. Someone who knows they are being studied will act differently than someone who isn't being studied so models will be inaccurate.
|
|
|
|
\newpage
|
|
\subsection{Unit 3: Bayesian Statistics}
|
|
This unit was deliberately separated from statistical review due to the percieved complexity of the topic and the magnitude of usage in recent data science
|
|
breakthroughs. Bayes Theorem is a part of the cirriculum for both \textbf{MATH 351 - Probability and Statistics} and \textbf{CSCI 420 - Principles of Data Mining}.
|
|
However, as both approached the topic from different perspectives and while neither solidified my personal confidence in its use, I chose to take extra time to learn
|
|
this important topic in my own way.
|
|
|
|
It has been said that statistics does not come naturally to the human brain, hence statistics is, by mathematical standards, a
|
|
young discipline. Resulting research on Bayesian statistics has led me to the conclusion that the opposite may be true - Bayes Theorem is quite intuitive, but
|
|
its discipline has not had the time to crystallize best practices for instructing it. For instance, updating one's beliefs to compare probabilities with the
|
|
number of documented occurrences is frequently used in philosophical discussion in the form of explanations that subsets with high liklihood of fufilling terms
|
|
are valid classifications even when the subset size results in overall fufilled terms to be infrequently categorized as the proposed subset. Most people understand
|
|
these expressions but, when shown a table and how to calculate those ratios, the content enters the realm of collegiate instruction.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Bayes Theorem}
|
|
|
|
The equation for Bayes Theorem is as follows:
|
|
|
|
\[
|
|
P(A|E) = \frac{P(A) * P(E|A)}{P(A) * P(E|A) + (1 - P(A)) * P(E|\neg A)}
|
|
\]
|
|
|
|
This formula appears more complex as it is. The denominator, while directly translating to "The probability of A times the probability of event E occuring in A
|
|
divided by the probability of A times the probability of event E occuring in A plus the probability of not A times the probability of E occuring in not A"
|
|
can be more easily expressed simply as \(P(E)\) or the probability of event E occuring.
|
|
|
|
By utilizing venacular more familiar to everyday life, Bayes Theorem can be translated into:
|
|
|
|
\[
|
|
\text{P(occurence came from category)} = \frac{\text{\# of occurences from category}}{\text{total \# of occurences}}
|
|
\]
|
|
|
|
Finally, this equation is updated to replace descriptions with technical terms:
|
|
|
|
\[
|
|
\text{Posterior Probability} = \frac{\text{prior} * \text{likelihood}}{\text{Evidence}}
|
|
\]
|
|
|
|
Even this equation can be misconstrued as a number of arrangements of ratios involving total occurrences from a category or non-occurrences from outside
|
|
of the category so as a final demonstration, the sample space can be visualized geometrically as a 1 unit by 1 unit
|
|
square\footnote{Concept credit to 3Blue1Brown on Youtube, this video is what finally clarified in my mind what the frankly simple equation behind Bayes Theorem
|
|
meant.\\\url{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZGCoVF3YvM}}. The area of this square, 1 unit squared, is the equivalent to a probability of 1 (or 100\%).
|
|
In such an example, a vertical line is drawn to separate proportions representative of the category (or the assumed-true event) and observations not of that category.
|
|
Horizontal lines drawn in each represent the probability of an occurrence in each category.
|
|
|
|
Consider an example where a cancer test given to 1,000 people has a 95\% accuracy rate. Of those 1,000 people, 10\% of them have cancer, 95 of whom test positive
|
|
(true positive) and 5 who test negative (false negative). Of the remaining 900, 45 test positive (false positive) and 855 test negative (true negative). Such
|
|
an example can be expressed visually as:
|
|
\vskip 2pt
|
|
\begin{center}
|
|
\begin{tikzpicture}
|
|
\draw[gray, thick] (0,0) rectangle (3,3);
|
|
\draw[gray, thin] (3/10, 0) -- (3/10, 3);
|
|
\draw[gray, thin] (0, 0) rectangle (3/10, 3*.95);
|
|
\node[label=below:95/1000] at (-1,1) {TP};
|
|
\draw[->] (-.6, 1) -- (.15, 1);
|
|
\node[label=below:45/1000] at (1.5,-2/3) {FP};
|
|
\draw[->] (1.5, -1/3) -- (1.5, .05);
|
|
\draw[gray, thin] (3/10, 0) rectangle (3, 3*.05);
|
|
\end{tikzpicture}
|
|
\end{center}
|
|
\vskip 2pt
|
|
Using this visual where TP represents true positives and FP representing false positives, Bayes Theorem is simply expressed as:
|
|
\[
|
|
P(A|E) = \frac{TP}{TP + FP} = \frac{\frac{95}{1000}}{\frac{95}{1000} + \frac{45}{1000}} = 67.9\%
|
|
\]
|
|
Meaning that, given a random positive test, there is a 67.9\% chance of the patient actually having cancer. This percentage visually tracks with the graphic as
|
|
the TP box appears to be approximately twice the size of the FP box, giving a two-thirds chance of the patient being a true positive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Bayesian Updating}
|
|
Bayesian Updating is another term that has been added to buzzword vocabulary to describe a process that isn't directly related to Bayesian Statistics but appears
|
|
to have been rediscovered by academia through study of applied Bayes Theorem. In essence, Bayesian Updating simply states that observed occurrences should not
|
|
override previous evidence and that it should instead be added to it in equal weight (equal value being a naive assumption). This evidence updating makes
|
|
applications of Bayes Theory calculate posterior probabilities continuously as new information enters the system rather than a calculation that is only done once.
|
|
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Bayesian Belief Networks}
|
|
Bayesian Belief Networks are probablistic graphical models that preserve conditional dependence between random variables. In spite of its name,
|
|
Bayesian Belief Networks do not necessarily apply Bayesian models, though they are a way to utilize Bayes Theorem for domains with greater complexity beyond a
|
|
single posterior probability. In this type of network, edges are directed and the structure is utilized in a single direction. This is in contrast to undirected
|
|
Hidden Markov Models that do not assume the order of aquisition of random variables.
|
|
|
|
\end{document} |