2
$\begingroup$

Markov transition fields come from this article: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282181246_Spatially_Encoding_Temporal_Correlations_to_Classify_Temporal_Data_Using_Convolutional_Neural_Networks

They are quite well explained here: https://lazyprogrammer.me/convert-a-time-series-into-an-image/

M_kl (one element of the transition field) is then just the probability that we saw a direct one-step (i.e. Markovian) transition from q_k to q_l in the time series.

But the article states:

By assigning the probability from the quantile at time step i to the quantile at time step j at each pixel M_ij , the MTF M actually encodes multi-step transition probabilities of the time series. M_i,j||i−j|=k denotes the transition probability between the points with time interval k.

and

By scattering the first-order transition probability into the temporally ordered matrix, MTFs encode the transition dynamics between different time lags k.


I don't understand what is meant by these sentences because the transition matrix really just contains probabilities of transitions between quantiles of neighboring elements in the time series, i.e. number of steps is always considered to be 1 by definition so I don't get how it can be true that it "encodes the transition dynamics between different time lags k" - k is a difference between two timestamps in the time series. The k (number of steps to reach another quantile) is not taken into account in the definition of Markov transition field.

And actually it would make sense to me if it was taken into account and we would put into the Markov transition field the probabilities that one quantile changes into another in k steps. Why it isn't like that?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe "probabilities that one quantile changes into another in k steps" doesn't really make that much sense in the context of Markov chains but maybe rather "probabilities that one quantile changes into another while passing the same number number of intermediate states (quantiles)". I just want to say that I would expect some definition that takes into account distance of each two points in the time series to be able to interpret the statement from the original article. I know my explanation is probably lacking due to my inexperience in this area. $\endgroup$
    – clime
    Commented Jan 2, 2022 at 18:23

2 Answers 2

0
$\begingroup$

Imagine you have three states, A B C, and your transition probability matrix looks like this:

  A  | B  | C
A .5 | .5 |  0
B .3 | .4 | .3
C  0 | .5 |  5

(e.g. from state A there's a .5 chance of staying in A and a .5 chance of transitioning to B)

It's easy to see that this encodes the probabilities for the three possible lag-1 transitions starting at A:

  • A -> A (p = .5)
  • A -> B (p = .5)
  • A -> C (p = 0)

The trick is that it you can calculate the lag-2 transition probabilities by multiplying together the lag-1 probabilities:

  • A -> A -> A: p = .5 * .5 = .25
  • A -> A -> B: p = .5 * .5 = .25
  • A -> B -> A: p = .5 * .3 = .15
  • A -> B -> B: p = .5 * .4 = .20
  • A -> B -> C: p = .5 * .3 = .15

Finally, if you just want to know the probability of being in state B two steps after being in state A, you simply add up the probabilities of all the chains of transitions that would get you there:

P(A -> ? -> B) = P(A -> A -> B) + P(A -> B -> B) = .45

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. That's quite useful to know but it doesn't really address the question because Markov transition field is something else than Markov transition matrix which you are explaining. Thanks anyway, it's always good to refresh the basics. $\endgroup$
    – clime
    Commented Jan 6, 2022 at 20:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Whoops, missed "field", sorry! $\endgroup$
    – Eoin
    Commented Jan 7, 2022 at 10:00
0
$\begingroup$

I did try some other interpretations. E.g. consider that the points i, j have a distance |i - j| between them and therefore calculate the probability of transition between the respective quantiles for the points in that number of steps (i.e. on the main diagonal there will be just 1s as the distance is zero).

Needless to say, so far I have had more success with the original definition (where the probability is always that one quantile changes into another in a single step) when the resulting field is employed into a simple machine learning model.

$\endgroup$

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.