In the introduction of "Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation" (Li et al., 2018), implicit models are defined as the deterministic parameterized transformation $T_\theta(\cdot)$ of an analytic distribution e.g. an isotropic Gaussian:
- Sample $\mathbf{z} \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \mathbf{I})$
- Return $\mathbf{x} := T_\theta(\mathbf{z})$
The marginal likelihood of such models is written as:
\begin{equation} p_{\theta}(\mathbf{x}) =\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{1}} \cdots \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{d}} \int_{\left\{\mathbf{z} | \forall i\left(T_{\theta}(\mathbf{z})\right)_{i} \leq x_{i}\right\}} \phi(\mathbf{z}) d \mathbf{z} \\ \end{equation}
where $\phi(\cdot)$ denotes the probability density function (PDF) of $\mathcal{N}(0, \mathbf{I})$.
Why is this the case?
It seems like the integral $\int_{\left\{\mathbf{z} | \forall i\left(T_{\theta}(\mathbf{z})\right)_{i} \leq x_{i}\right\}} \phi(\mathbf{z}) d \mathbf{z}$ is the CDF evaluated at $\mathbf{z}$, since generally speaking the CDF is the integral of the PDF from $-\inf$ to $\mathbf{z}$, i.e. $F_X(x)=\int_{-\infty}^xf(x)\mathrm dx$.
Why would the chained partial derivatives of the CDF of the latent variable $\mathbf{z}$ (is it in a sense w.r.t. $T_\theta$?) yield the marginal likelihood of the transformed $\mathbf{z}$?
Might be on the completely wrong track here. Would appreciate some enlightenment!