5
$\begingroup$

I have the following question:

Let $X_1,\dots,X_n$ be independent, identically distributed random variables with $$ P(X_i=1)=\theta = 1-P(X_i=0) $$

where $\theta$ is an unknown parameter, $0<\theta<1$, and $n\geq 2$. It is desired to estimate the quantity $\phi = \theta(1-\theta) = nVar((X_1+\dots+X_N)/n)$.

Suppose that a Bayesian approach is adopted and that the prior distribution for $\theta$, $\pi(\theta)$, is taken to be the uniform distribution on $(0,1)$. Compute the Bayes point estimate of $\phi$ when the loss function is $L(\phi,a)=(\phi-a)^2$.

Now, my solution so far:

It can easily be proven that $a$ needs to be the mean of the posterior. Also, when $\theta$ spans $(0,1)$, $\phi$ spans $(0,\frac{1}{4}]$. Hence, we have that $$ a = \int_0^{\frac{1}{4}}\phi\cdot f(\phi|x_1,\dots,x_n)d\phi. $$

Now, we have that $$ f(\phi|x_1,\dots,x_n)\propto f(x_1,\dots,x_n|\phi)\cdot \pi(\phi). $$

Given that $\theta$ follows $U[0,1]$, we get that $\phi$ follows:

$$ P(\Phi\leq t) = \frac{1-\sqrt{1-4t}}{2} $$

Hence we can derive $\pi(\phi)$. However, I am not sure how to derive $f(x_i|\phi)$.

Help proceeding forward and letting me know if I have made any mistakes so far would be very appreciated.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ In fact there is no need for the estimator to be the posterior mean. It all depends on the loss function adopted for ranking estimators. $\endgroup$
    – Xi'an
    Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:48
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, it is the mean in the case of this particular loss function. That is why I said it is the mean (in the context of this problem) $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 21, 2020 at 13:50

3 Answers 3

4
$\begingroup$

$$ \theta \sim \text{Beta}(a_0,b_0) $$ $$ X_i\mid\theta\sim\text{Ber}(\theta) \qquad\qquad i=1,\dots,n $$ $$ X:=X_1+\dots+X_n $$ $$ X\mid\theta \sim \text{Bin}(n,\theta) $$ $$ \theta \mid X = x \sim \text{Beta}(x + a_0,n - x + b_0) $$ $$ \text{E}[\theta \mid X = x] = \frac{x + a_0}{n + a_0 + b_0} $$ $$ \text{Var}[\theta \mid X = x] = \frac{(x+a_0)(n-x+b_0)}{(n + a_0 + b_0)^2(n + a_0 + b_0 + 1)} $$

$$ \phi=\text{Var}[X_i \mid \theta]=\theta(1-\theta) $$

Under quadratic loss, the Bayes estimate for $\phi$ is: \begin{align*} \hat{\phi}_{\text{Bayes}}(x) &= \text{E}[\phi \mid X = x] \\ &= \text{E}[\theta \mid X = x] - \text{E}[\theta^2 \mid X = x] \\ &= \text{E}[\theta \mid X = x] - \text{Var}[\theta \mid X = x] - \text{E}^2[\theta \mid X = x] \\ &= \frac{(x+a_0)(n-x+b_0)}{(n + a_0 + b_0)(n + a_0 + b_0 + 1)} \end{align*}

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

One idea would be to perform the simulation since you do the Bayesian. The posterior for $\theta$ is of closed-form and hence you can easily simulate from $p(\theta|x)$. Then you just apply your function $\phi^m = f(\theta^m) = \theta^m(1 - \theta^m), m = 1,\ldots, N$ where $N$ - number of simulated points from the posterior. Finally you just find $\hat{\phi} = \frac{\sum_{m=1}^N \phi^m}{N}$.

Let me clarify a little bit more. The posterior density for $p(\theta|x)$ has the following form

\begin{align} p(\theta|x) \sim \mathcal{B}(\alpha + \sum x_i, \beta + n - \sum x_i), \end{align} where $\pi(\theta) \sim \mathcal{U}(0,1) = \mathcal{B}(1,1)$, hence $\alpha = \beta = 1$ and $\mathcal{B}(.,.)$ means a beta distribution. Please refer to wiki for the clarifications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjugate_prior. Now you can simulate from this density. See the attached code.


# Set a seed
set.seed(3)

# Number of observations
N <- 1e2

# Set the true value to check
theta_true <- 0.5

# Compute the true phi
phi_true <- theta_true*(1 - theta_true)

# Simulate the data given the parameteres
x <- rbinom(N, size = 1, prob = theta_true)

# Estimate the posterior
alpha_new <- 1 + sum(x)
beta_new  <- 1 + N - sum(x)

# Sample from the posterior
theta_sample <- rbeta(n = N, shape1 = alpha_new, shape2 = beta_new)

# Estimate the posterior mean for the draws
mean(theta_sample)
theta_true
# close
phi_sample <- theta_sample*(1 - theta_sample)


# Estimate the posterior mean for the draws
mean(phi_sample)
phi_true
# close
```
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I don't get what you mean. I am not supposed to produce a computer simulation. I am interested in the actual mathematical proof of deriving $f(x_i|\phi)$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 23, 2020 at 9:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As far as I understand your goal is to compute the $a$, where $a = \mathbb{E}[\phi]$. You can proceed in two ways, the first one is analytically derive the density $f(\phi|x)$ and compute the integral. What I propose is the numerically approximate this number. My suggestion is to sample from the posterior $p(\theta|x)$ since this is a well known distribution and then apply the function $\phi = f(\theta) = \theta(1 - \theta)$ to these draws to obtain the posterior draws from the $p(\phi|x)$. Finally, you just average them and obtain the $a$. I will add the R-code. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 23, 2020 at 11:49
0
$\begingroup$

Since X is a bernoulli random variable, we can say that $f(x_i|\theta)= \theta^{X_i}(1-\theta)^{1- X_i}$, but given is $\phi$, so by equation $\phi = \theta(1-\theta)$, write $\theta = f(\phi)$ and substitute in above equation, we get $$f(x_i|\phi)= f(\phi)^{X_i}(1-f(\phi))^{1- X_i}$$

$\endgroup$

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.