This question is about Bayesian Networks. I want to calculate the probability for certain events to be in a certain state knowing all conditional probabilities.

Consider that I am totally new to Bayesian Networks.

The problem

Consider a Bayesian Network. For all variables $A_i,B_i \dots Z_i$ in the network I know the potentials in the form $P\{ A_i | par(A_i) \}=P\{A_i | B_1 \dots B_n\}$ for all possible states $a_i,b_1 \dots b_n$. These potentials are calculated using subjective probabilities.

Calculating single probabilities

What I know are just potentials. For example, for variable $A_i$ I do not know $P\{A_i = a_i\}$ but I know $P\{A_i = a_i | B_1=b_1 \dots B_n=b_n\}$. Where $B_1, B_2 \dots B_n$ are parents of $A_i$.

I want to calculate $P\{A_i = a_i\}$. Consider that No restrictions are considered so this variable $A_i$ can have parents and children. As well as $B_1 \dots B_n$.

It does not seem too complicated. Having potentials I can use the total probability law and:

$$P\{ A_i = a_i \} = \sum_{\forall b_1 \dots b_n} P\{ A_i = a_i | B_1=b_1 \dots B_n=b_n \} \cdot P\{B_1=b_1 \dots B_n=b_n \}$$

In the sum, the first part: $P\{ A_i = a_i | B_1=b_1 \dots B_n=b_n \}$ can be calculated using potentials.

What about $P\{B_1=b_1 \dots B_n=b_n \}$. That is, How can I calculate the probability that some variables have some state contemporarly? Please note that $B_1 \dots B_n$ are not one parent of the other, they are on the same level of the network, they are peers, meaning they have no parent relationship. They are parents of $A_i$.

The question

Generally speaking, how to calculate the probability that some variables are in some state contemporarly? When they have no parent relationships? Preconditions are: I know the conditional probabilites (potentials).


Do $A_i$ have no children? Do $B$ have no parents?

In general, you can't know $P(B_i)$ without also evaluating $P(A_i)$ because diagnostic evidence from below $A$ can affect $A$, which affects $B$.

I think the efficient solution is to calculate lambda and pi messages, which are the predictive and diagnostic evidence from the parent and child nodes of $A$.

For details, see lecture 10 and 11 from here. If I have time, I'll come back and summarize the notes.

  • $\begingroup$ Sorry I am new to this things... I updated a little my question. Why can't I use the total prob law to get the single probability? What do you mean by lambda? $\endgroup$
    – Andry
    Apr 17 '12 at 1:12
  • $\begingroup$ If you think there is a better approach rather than the total prob law, please tell me about lambda and messages. It will be very appreciated. Thanks for your efforts. $\endgroup$
    – Andry
    Apr 17 '12 at 1:13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Andry: see my edit. $\endgroup$
    – Neil G
    Apr 17 '12 at 1:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.