2
$\begingroup$

I'm doing some homework for self-study in probalistic graphical models, and this question has me stumped.

I'm pretty sure the answer is no. But I don't know how to prove it.

So far, I have:

(1) A ⊥ B | C ==> P(A, B | C) = P(A | C) P(B | C)
(2) A ⊥ C | B ==> P(A, C | B) = P(A | B) P(C | B)
(3) P(A, B, C) = P(A, B | C) P(C)
(4) P(A, B, C) = P(A, C | B) P(B)
(5) combining (1) and (3), P(A, B, C) = P(A | C) P(B | C) P(C) = P(A | C) P(B , C)
(6) combining (2) and (4), P(A, B, C) = P(A | B) P(C | B) P(B) = P(A | B) P(B , C)
(7) from (5) and (6), P(A | C) = P(A | B)

Given the last statement, it seems that in order for A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C, it must be true that either (a) everything is independent or (b) B = C. I'm having a hard time coming up with a proof, though. Not sure what kind of counterexample I could use.

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

A ⊥ B | C and A ⊥ C | B, is A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C?

No, for example, let $B=C$. Conditional statements hold, but $A$ and $B$ doesn't have to be independent in the first place.

it seems that in order for A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C, it must be true that either (a) everything is independent or (b) B = C

No, for example, B and C can be different events, every pair of events can be pairwise independent but $A,B,C$ not mutually independent (which is what I understood from your 'everything is independent' idea).

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

We have probabilities for 8 different situations

$$\begin{array}{rrrr} P(& A,& B,& C) \\ P(&!A,& B,& C) \\ P(& A,&!B,& C) \\ P(&!A,&!B,& C) \\ P(& A,& B,&!C) \\ P(&!A,& B,&!C) \\ P(& A,&!B,&!C) \\ P(&!A,&!B,&!C) \\ \end{array}$$

Given the information there are several equations that allow to restrict the values.

With the conditional independence there are four equations that restrict these values

$$A \perp B | C \\ \begin{array}{rcl} \frac{P(A,!B,!C)}{P(!A,!B,!C)} = \frac{P(A,B,!C)}{P(!A,B,!C)}\\ \frac{P(A,!B,C)}{P(!A,!B,C)} = \frac{P(A,B,C)}{P(!A,B,C)}\\ \end{array} \\ A \perp C | B \\ \begin{array}{rcl} \frac{P(A,B,C)}{P(!A,B,C)} = \frac{P(A,B,!C)}{P(!A,B,!C)}\\ \frac{P(A,!B,C)}{P(!A,!B,C)} = \frac{P(A,!B,!C)}{P(!A,!B,!C)}\\ \end{array} \\ $$

And because of some repetitions we can combine them

$$\frac{P(A,B,C)}{P(!A,B,C)} = \frac{P(A,!B,C)}{P(!A,!B,C)} = \frac{P(A,B,!C)}{P(!A,B,!C)} = \frac{P(A,!B,!C)}{P(!A,!B,!C)}$$

Which means that there are effectively 3 equations for the dependence but it straps all odds ratios for the events $A$ and $!A$, which are the same independent of all four possible conditions of $B$ and $C$ and therefore $A$ is independent of $B$ and independent of $C$.

Thus, A ⊥ B | C and A ⊥ C | B implies A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C.

More strictly we have

Thus, A ⊥ B | C and A ⊥ C | B if and only if A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C.


Given the condition "A ⊥ B | C and A ⊥ C | B" we can express all 8 values in terms of only 4 values.

We use $P(B)$, $P(C)$, $P(B,C)$ and $P(A)$ to express all values.

With the additional derived values $$\begin{array}{} P(!B,!C) &=& 1-P(B)-P(C)+P(B,C)\\ P(B,!C) &=& P(B) - P(B,C)\\ P(!B,C) &=& P(C) - P(B,C)\\ P(!A) &=& 1 - P(A)\end{array}$$

you get the following

$$\begin{array}{rrrrl} P(& A,& B,& C) & = &P(A) \cdot P(B,C)\\ P(&!A,& B,& C) & =& P(!A) \cdot P(B,C)\\ P(& A,&!B,& C) & = &P(A) \cdot P(!B,C)\\ P(&!A,&!B,& C) & =& P(!A) \cdot P(!B,C)\\\ P(& A,& B,&!C) & =& P(A) \cdot P(B,!C)\\ P(&!A,& B,&!C) & =& P(!A) \cdot P(B,!C)\\ P(& A,&!B,&!C) & =& P(A) \cdot P(!B,!C)\\ P(&!A,&!B,&!C) & =& P(!A) \cdot P(!B,!C)\\ \end{array}$$


it seems that in order for A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C, it must be true that either (a) everything is independent or (b) B = C.

No, based on the above, we only need 'A ⊥ B and A ⊥ C'; the variables B and C can be independent and do not need to be B = C.

$\endgroup$

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.