3
$\begingroup$

I've been reading about the Dirichlet distribution and have become somewhat confused as to how to evaluate its normalisation term.

Specifically, I'm quite happy with the relationship between the beta and gamma functions:

$\frac{\Gamma(x)\Gamma(y)}{\Gamma(x+y)}=B(x,y)$, but wikipedia then claims that more generally: $\frac{\prod_{i}\Gamma(x_{i})}{\Gamma(\sum_{i}x_{i})}=B(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots, x_{n})$

Sticking with three variables for simplicity, how is $B(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3})$ defined?

Using the above relation for 2 parameters:

$\Gamma(x)\Gamma(y)=\Gamma(x+y)B(x,y)$, hence

$\Gamma(x)\Gamma(y)\Gamma(z)=\Gamma(x+y)B(x,y)\Gamma(z)$, which, with repeated application of the above becomes:

$\Gamma(x)\Gamma(y)\Gamma(z)=B(x,y)B(x+y,z)\Gamma(x+y+z)$

This suggests, using formula on wikipedia for three variables, that:

$B(x,y,z)=B(x,y)B(x+y,z)$

I wrote the RHS of this out and played about with some substitutions, but couldn't show it to equal what I would expect, which is something of the form:

$\int_{0}^{1}dq \cdot q^{x-1}\int_{0}^{1-q}dp \cdot p^{y-1}(1-p-q)^{z-1}$

I expected something of the above form, because it seems like that would normalise the Dirichlet distribution.

More generally, is there a nice trick for evaluating nested normalisation terms of the form:

$\int_{0}^{1}p_{1}^{\alpha _{1}}dp_{1}\int_{0}^{1-p_{1}}p_{2}^{\alpha _{2}}dp _{2}\int_{0}^{1-p_{1}-p_{2}}p_{3}^{\alpha_{3}}dp_{3}\ldots \int_{0}^{1-\sum _{i=1}^{n-2}p_{i}}p_{n-1}^{\alpha _{n-1}}dp_{n-1}(1-\sum _{i=1}^{n-1}p_{i})^{\alpha _{n}}$

I'm hoping that the way to solve this for n=3 generalises in some fairly simple way?

Or, alternatively, is the above integral not the correct normalisation term for an N variable Dirichlet Distribution?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What's unsatisfactory about the Wikipedia definition? $\endgroup$
    – jbowman
    Commented Oct 23, 2017 at 20:29
  • $\begingroup$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_function#Multivariate_beta_function is the wikipedia definition, i.e. it has been defined in terms of the Gamma function. If that's the official definition, then my problem could be rephrased as "how can one show that the normalisation term in the Dirichlet distribution with K=3 (and above) is related to the Gamma function?" $\endgroup$
    – gazza89
    Commented Oct 23, 2017 at 22:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your definition of the multivariate beta distribution is wrong. The numerator should have a $\prod_i$ as opposed to a $\sum_i$. $\endgroup$
    – Alex R.
    Commented Oct 24, 2017 at 19:47
  • $\begingroup$ apologies , that was a typo, I've corrected (it doesn't alter the question in any way) $\endgroup$
    – gazza89
    Commented Oct 24, 2017 at 21:22

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

The Definition of the Dirichlet distribution is $f(x_1,...,x_K;\alpha_1,...,\alpha_K)=\frac{1}{C_K(\alpha)}\prod_{i=1}^Kx_i^{\alpha_i-1}$, where $x_i$ live on a $K-1$ simplex. So, by definition

$$C_K(\alpha)=\int_{simplex}\prod_{i=1}^Kx_i^{\alpha_i-1}dx_1\cdots dx_k.$$

What follows is a proof-sketch. One way of evaluating this integral is to evaluate a more general integral on $x_1+\cdots+x_{K}=t$ with $x_i\geq 0$. By dividing through by $t$, we get a re-parametrization $u_i=x_i/t$ which places us back on the simplex. In other words define:

$$C_k(\alpha,t):=t^{\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_k}\int_{simplex}\prod_{i=1}^{k}u_i^{\alpha_i-1}du_1\cdots du_k$$

Then:

\begin{align*} C_K(\alpha)&=\int_0^1C_{K-1}(\alpha,x)(1-x)^{\alpha_K-1}dx=C_{K-1}(\alpha)B(\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_{K-1},\alpha_K)\\ &=C_{K-1}(\alpha)\frac{\Gamma(\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_{K-1})\Gamma(\alpha_K)}{\Gamma(\alpha_1+\cdots+\alpha_K)}. \end{align*}

All we've done is "shell" the simplex of $x_1+\cdots+x_K=1$ by supposing that $x_1+\cdots+x_{K-1}=t$ and $x_K=1-t$.

So,

$$C_K(\alpha)=\frac{C_{K}(\alpha)}{C_{K-1}(\alpha)}\frac{C_{K-1}(\alpha)}{C_{K-2}(\alpha)}\cdots \frac{C_3(\alpha)}{C_2(\alpha)}C_2(\alpha).$$

Note that you'll have to evaluate $C_2(\alpha)$ by hand to get the base case usual beta function. This cancels the long gamma factors in the numerators and gives:

$$C_K(\alpha)=\frac{\prod_{i=1}^K\Gamma(\alpha_i)}{\Gamma(\sum_{i=1}^n\alpha_i)}$$

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

A colleague of mine has suggested the following solution:

The Dirichlet Distribution with N variables should be normalised by the following:

$\int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{1} (p_{1}^{x_{1}-1})\int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{2} (p_{2}^{x_{2}-1})\ldots \int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{N} (p_{N}^{x_{N}-1})\delta(1-\sum_{i} p_{i})$

In which $\delta(x)$ is the Dirac delta function. Note that as long as we restrict these integrals over a positive interval, we can extend them to $+\infty$ due to the $\delta$ function.

If we define the multi-variate beta-function to be the normalisation term of the Dirichlet distribution, then to prove the recursion relationship which is stated as its definition on wikipedia (and in effect, derive a more easy to evaluate form of the normalisation term), then we want to prove:

$\Gamma(\sum_{i} x_{i})\int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{1} (p_{1}^{x_{1}-1})\int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{2} (p_{2}^{x_{2}-1})\ldots \int_{0}^{\infty}d p_{N} (p_{N}^{x_{N}-1})\delta(1-\sum_{i} p_{i})= \prod _{i} \Gamma (x_{i})$

If we expand the gamma function on the LHS, and write the product as a "double" (in reality N+1) integral, the LHS =

$\int _{0}^{\infty}dzdp_{1}dp_{2}\ldots dp_{N}\hspace{3mm} e^{-z}\cdot z^{\sum_{i} x_{i} -1} \cdot p_{1}^{x_{1}-1}\ldots p_{N}^{X_{N}-1}\delta (1-\sum_{i}p_{1})$

Very similarly to Alex R's response above, we now perform the change of variables $(p_{1}, p_{2},\ldots, p_{n}, z) \to (u_{1}, u_{2},\ldots, u_{n}, y) $ using the transformation $p_{i}=\frac{u_{i}}{y}, z=y$

This results in a transformation Jacobian of $\frac{1}{y^{N}}$, and the limits of integration all remain $0 \to \infty$. Consequently, our multiple integral can be written as:

$\int _{0}^{\infty}du_{1}\ldots du_{N}dy \hspace{2mm}(\frac{1}{y^{N}})(\frac{u_{1}}{y})^{x_{1}-1}(\frac{u_{2}}{y})^{x_{2}-1} \ldots (\frac{u_{N}}{y})^{x_{N}-1}\delta(1-\sum_{i}\frac{u_{i}}{y})y^{\sum_{i}x_{i} -1}e^{-y} $

By writing the delta function as $y\cdot \delta (y- \sum_{i}u_{i})$, we can make all of the factors of y cancel, meaning we only need to evaluate the integral

$\int _{0}^{\infty}du_{1}\ldots du_{N}dy\hspace{2mm}u_{1}^{x_{1}-1}u_{2}^{x_{2}-1}\ldots u_{N}^{X_{N}-1}e^{-y}\delta(y-\sum_{i}u_{i})$

which after integrating against the delta function, does indeed give us

$\int_{0}^{\infty} du_{1}du_{2}\ldots du_{N}\hspace{2mm} u_{1}^{x_{1}-1}u_{2}^{x_{2}-1}\ldots u_{N}^{x_{N}-1}e^{-\sum_{i}u_{i}}=\prod_{i} \Gamma(x_{i})$

and hence the term which normalises the Dirichlet distribution is indeed equal to $\frac{\prod _{i}\Gamma(x_{i})}{\Gamma(\sum_{i}x_{i})}$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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