How do I complete the square from the point I have left off at, and is this correct so far?

I have a normal prior for $\beta$ of the form $p(\beta|\sigma^2)\sim \mathcal{N}(0,\sigma^2V)$, to get:


where $\beta^T\beta$ is $\sum\limits_{i=1}^p \beta_i^2$.

My likelihood has a normal distribtuion for the data points y of the form $p(y|\beta,\sigma^2)\sim\mathcal{N}(B\beta,\sigma^2I) $

$p(y|\beta,\sigma^2)=(2\pi \sigma^2V)^\frac{n}{2}\exp[-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}({\bf y}-{\bf B}{\bf \beta})^T({\bf y}-{\bf B}{\bf \beta})]$

(Note that $\beta$ is a matrix/vector too, \bf does not work.)

To get my posterior for $\beta$ I combined the above, took the exponential parts only, and then expanded to get:

$\exp[-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}({\bf y}^T{\bf y}-{\bf y}^T{\bf B}\beta-\beta{\bf B}^T{\bf y}-\beta^T{\bf B}^T{\bf B}\beta)]\exp[-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}({\bf \beta}^T{\bf B})]$.

I dropped the $({\bf y}^T{\bf y})$ term, as is not a function of $\beta$.

Putting into one expression without the exponential:

$-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}(-{\bf y}^T{\bf B}\beta-\beta{\bf B}^T{\bf y}-\beta^T{\bf B}^T{\bf B}\beta+{\bf \beta}^T{\bf B})$.

I know I need to combine the similar terms and get into the form of the multivariate normal distribution, which is what I am aiming for, but I am unsure how to do this? I probably have to add an extra term to the expression to get it into the correct form?

Note: This is not homework, it's a project, but my Bayesian working knowledge is not good at all and so I need to understand the working out. I intend to integrate out the $\beta$ and then the $\sigma^2$ after getting into the multivariate form.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you are only interested in the calculation, this link might be of interest. $\endgroup$ – user10525 Jul 31 '12 at 15:29
  • $\begingroup$ It might not be your homework, but I think I remember this problem from the Gelman et al Bayesian data analysis textbook $\endgroup$ – David LeBauer Aug 2 '12 at 7:08
  • $\begingroup$ The link for the wikipedia page above is what I am trying to do, but it's the actual working out I do not know how to do. $\endgroup$ – Ellie Aug 7 '12 at 15:18
  • $\begingroup$ I am looking through the book 'Bayesian data analysis' and I have found in chapter 15 that it is indeed a similar layout to what I am trying to do, but again there is no working out to follow. $\endgroup$ – Ellie Aug 7 '12 at 15:20

I'll start from scratch, since the original post has some math typos like wrong signs, dropping the $V$ matrix, etc.

You've specified prior $p(\beta)=\mathcal{N}( 0, \sigma^2 V )$ and likelihood: $p(y | \beta ) = \mathcal{N}( B\beta, \sigma^2I )$.

We can write each of these purely as expressions of terms inside the $\exp$ that depend on $\beta$, grouping all terms unrelated to $\beta$ into a single constant:

$\log p( \beta ) + \mbox{const} = -\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} \beta^T V^{-1} \beta$

$\log p( y | \beta ) + \mbox{const} = -\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}( \beta^T B^TB \beta - 2y^T B \beta ) \quad$ (note that $y^TB\beta = \beta^T B^T y$ always)

Added these in log space and collecting like terms yields the unnormalized log posterior

$\log p( \beta | y ) + \mbox{const} = -\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}( \beta^T(V^{-1} + B^TB)\beta - 2y^T B \beta )\quad$ (1)

... here, we've used the standard identity $x^TAx + x^TCx = x^T(A+C)x$ for any vectors $x$ and matrices $A,C$ of appropriate size.

OK, our goal is now to "complete" the square. We'd like an expression of the form below, which would indicate that the posterior for $\beta$ is Gaussian.

$\log p( \beta | y ) + \mbox{const} = (\beta - \mu_p)^T \Lambda_p (\beta - \mu_p ) = \beta^T \Lambda_p \beta -2\mu_p^T \Lambda_p \beta + \mu_p^T \Lambda_p \mu_p$

where parameters $\mu_p, \Lambda_p$ define the posterior mean and inverse covariance matrix respectively.

Well, by inspection eqn. (1) looks a lot like this form if we set

$\Lambda_p = V^{-1} + B^TB \quad$ and $\quad \mu_p = \Lambda_p^{-1}B^Ty$

In detail, we can show that this substitution creates each necessary term from (1):

quadratic term: $\beta^T \Lambda_p \beta = \beta^T( V^{-1} + B^TB)\beta$

linear term: $\mu_p^T \Lambda_p \beta = ( \Lambda_p^{-1}B^Ty )^T \Lambda_p \beta = y^T B \Lambda_p^{-1} \Lambda_p \beta = y^T B \beta$

.... here we used facts $(AB)^T = B^T A^T$ and $(\Lambda_p^{-1})^T =\Lambda_p^{-1}$ due to symmetry ($\Lambda_p$ is symmetric, then so is its inverse).

However, this leaves us with a pesky extra term $\mu_p^T \Lambda_p \mu_p$. To avoid this, we just subtract this term from our final result. Thus, we can directly substitute our $\mu_p, \Lambda_p$ parameters into (1) to get

$\log p( \beta | y ) + \mbox{const} = -\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}[ (\beta-\mu_p)^T\Lambda_p(\beta-\mu_p) - \mu_p\Lambda_p\mu_p ]$

since that last term is constant with respect to $\beta$, we can just smash it into the big normalization constant on the left hand side and we've achieved our goal.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ The last term of the last equation should be $\mu_p^T \Lambda_p \mu_p$ $\endgroup$ – alberto Sep 17 '14 at 11:15

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.