I noticed that the formula for Gauss (or Newton-Cotes) quadrature looks very similar to the formula for the PDF of a general mixture distribution.
Let $p_{comp}(x)$ be the PDF of a compound distribution given by the integral:
$$ p_{comp}(x)=\int_{\Theta} p_{param}(\theta)p(x, \theta)d\theta $$
Here we're essentially integrating $p(x, \theta)$ w.r.t. the parameter $\theta$ using the weighting function $p_{param}(\theta)$ which happens to be the PDF of the random parameter $\theta$.
Apply numerical integration like Gauss quadrature:
$$ p_{comp}(x) \approx \sum_{k=1}^K w_k p(x,\theta_k) $$
This already looks exactly like the PDF of a mixture, but we need to restrict the weights $w_k$ first:
Since numerical integration formulas must integrate polynomials up to some degree exactly, the first condition is that the "mixture" formula must integrate $\theta^0=1$ with weight $p_{param}(\theta)$ exactly:
$$\int_{\Theta} p_{param}(\theta)\times 1 d\theta = 1 = \sum_{k=1}^K w_k \times 1$$
The integral equals to one because the weight function $p_{param}(\theta)$ is a PDF. Thus, the weights must sum to one.
It's known that all weights $w_k$ of a Gaussian quadrature formula must be positive: $w_k > 0 \quad\forall k$. Even if we used Newton-Cotes, negative weights seem to be frowned upon since they introduce numerical instabilities.
Hence, the weights $w_k$ must be a discrete probability distribution (a probability mass function), mirroring the fact that $p_{param}(\theta)$ is also a probability distribution (a probability density function).
Having approximated the original compound distribution using numerical integration, we have:
- $p_{comp}(x) \approx \sum_{k=1}^K w_k p(x,\theta_k)$
- $\sum_{k=1}^K w_k = 1$
- $w_k > 0 \quad\forall k$
...which is the definition of a discrete mixture distribution.
So, in principle, if we knew the mixing distribution $p_{param}(\theta)$, we could've used Gauss quadrature to approximate the mixture PDF with considerable precision using the standard formula for the PDF of a mixture.
Question
Can the formula for discrete mixture distributions be derived in this manner? Does it make sense to say something like this?
We know that the PDF of a compound distribution is the integral $\int_{\Theta} p_{param}(\theta)p(x, \theta)d\theta$. It can be approximated using Gauss quadrature: $$\int_{\Theta} p_{param}(\theta)p(x, \theta)d\theta \approx \sum_{k=1}^K w_k p(x,\theta_k)$$
Apply the conditions that the weights must be positive and that the sum must at least integrate the constant $1$ exactly, show that the weights $w_k$ essentially form a discrete probability distribution.
Since the only thing we know about the mixing PDF $p_{param}(\theta)$ is that it's a PDF, we can't find neither the weights $w_k$ nor the nodes $\theta_k$ using Gaussian quadrature because it requires computation of moments of this unknown latent distribution: $\int_{\Theta}p_{param}(\theta) \theta^n d\theta$. Thus, we have to resort to statistical estimation methods like maximum likelihood.
Does this make any sense? Can one think about discrete mixtures this way?