Proving stochastic boundedness in rate of contraction posterior distribution












1














Consider a family of probability distributions $P_theta$ indexed by $theta in Theta$. The parameter space is endowed with some metric $d$. We assume that there is a true parameter $theta_0$, and we are interested of the convergence of the Bayesian posterior distribution, given a prior $Pi$. We denote the posterior distribution after $n$ samples by $Pi_n(cdot|X^{(n)})$.



The posterior distribution is said to contract at rate $epsilon_n to 0$ at $theta_0$ if $Pi_n(theta:d(theta,theta_0) > M_nepsilon_n | X^{(n)}) to 0$ in $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$ probability, for every $M_nto infty$ as $ntoinfty$ (i.e., regardless of how slow $M$ goes to infinity).



Now I have to proof the following proposition:




Suppose that the posterior distribution $Pi(cdot|X^{(n)})$ contracts
at rate $epsilon_n$ at $theta_0$. Then $hat{theta}_n$, defined as
the center of a (nearly) samllest ball that contains posterior mass at
least $frac{1}{2}$, satisfies $d(hattheta_n,theta_0) = O_P(epsilon_n)$ under $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$.




$O_P(epsilon_n)$ is not defined but I suppose it denotes stochastic boundedness (see wikipedia), that is, for $tildeepsilon >0$, there are $M, N in mathbb{N}$ such that for $n>N$, we have $P_{theta_0}^{(n)} ( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n > M) ) < tildeepsilon$.



The notes state the proof is very similar to a previous proof, which brought me to the following:



Let $B(theta,r)$ be the closed ball of radius $r$ centered at $theta$. Define $hat{r}_n(theta) = inf{r:Pi_n(B(theta,r)|X^{(n)}) geq frac{1}{2}}$.



Then $hat{r}_n(theta_0) < M_nepsilon_n$ with a probability tending to 1, with $M_n$ an arbitrary sequence with $M_n to infty$.



As we have chosen $hattheta_n$ as a nearly smallest ball, certainly $hat{r}_n(hattheta_n) leq hat{r}_n(theta_0) + frac{1}{n} < M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n}$.



Now, $B(theta_0,M_nepsilon_n)$ and $B(hattheta_n,hat{r}_n(hattheta_n))$ are not disjoint with probability tending to 1, since they would have a joined probability tending to 1.5. So:



$d(theta_0,hattheta_n) < 2M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n} implies d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n < 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$,



with probability tending to one. In other words, for $tildeepsilon >0$ there is some $N$ such that for $n>N$,



$P_{theta_0}( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n geq 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n} ) < tildeepsilon$.



However, if I understand stochastic boundedness correctly I need to somehow replace $2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$ with a fixed $M$. But since $M_n to infty$, I don't see how this is possible. Any ideas on what I could do?





lecture notes










share|cite|improve this question



























    1














    Consider a family of probability distributions $P_theta$ indexed by $theta in Theta$. The parameter space is endowed with some metric $d$. We assume that there is a true parameter $theta_0$, and we are interested of the convergence of the Bayesian posterior distribution, given a prior $Pi$. We denote the posterior distribution after $n$ samples by $Pi_n(cdot|X^{(n)})$.



    The posterior distribution is said to contract at rate $epsilon_n to 0$ at $theta_0$ if $Pi_n(theta:d(theta,theta_0) > M_nepsilon_n | X^{(n)}) to 0$ in $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$ probability, for every $M_nto infty$ as $ntoinfty$ (i.e., regardless of how slow $M$ goes to infinity).



    Now I have to proof the following proposition:




    Suppose that the posterior distribution $Pi(cdot|X^{(n)})$ contracts
    at rate $epsilon_n$ at $theta_0$. Then $hat{theta}_n$, defined as
    the center of a (nearly) samllest ball that contains posterior mass at
    least $frac{1}{2}$, satisfies $d(hattheta_n,theta_0) = O_P(epsilon_n)$ under $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$.




    $O_P(epsilon_n)$ is not defined but I suppose it denotes stochastic boundedness (see wikipedia), that is, for $tildeepsilon >0$, there are $M, N in mathbb{N}$ such that for $n>N$, we have $P_{theta_0}^{(n)} ( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n > M) ) < tildeepsilon$.



    The notes state the proof is very similar to a previous proof, which brought me to the following:



    Let $B(theta,r)$ be the closed ball of radius $r$ centered at $theta$. Define $hat{r}_n(theta) = inf{r:Pi_n(B(theta,r)|X^{(n)}) geq frac{1}{2}}$.



    Then $hat{r}_n(theta_0) < M_nepsilon_n$ with a probability tending to 1, with $M_n$ an arbitrary sequence with $M_n to infty$.



    As we have chosen $hattheta_n$ as a nearly smallest ball, certainly $hat{r}_n(hattheta_n) leq hat{r}_n(theta_0) + frac{1}{n} < M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n}$.



    Now, $B(theta_0,M_nepsilon_n)$ and $B(hattheta_n,hat{r}_n(hattheta_n))$ are not disjoint with probability tending to 1, since they would have a joined probability tending to 1.5. So:



    $d(theta_0,hattheta_n) < 2M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n} implies d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n < 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$,



    with probability tending to one. In other words, for $tildeepsilon >0$ there is some $N$ such that for $n>N$,



    $P_{theta_0}( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n geq 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n} ) < tildeepsilon$.



    However, if I understand stochastic boundedness correctly I need to somehow replace $2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$ with a fixed $M$. But since $M_n to infty$, I don't see how this is possible. Any ideas on what I could do?





    lecture notes










    share|cite|improve this question

























      1












      1








      1







      Consider a family of probability distributions $P_theta$ indexed by $theta in Theta$. The parameter space is endowed with some metric $d$. We assume that there is a true parameter $theta_0$, and we are interested of the convergence of the Bayesian posterior distribution, given a prior $Pi$. We denote the posterior distribution after $n$ samples by $Pi_n(cdot|X^{(n)})$.



      The posterior distribution is said to contract at rate $epsilon_n to 0$ at $theta_0$ if $Pi_n(theta:d(theta,theta_0) > M_nepsilon_n | X^{(n)}) to 0$ in $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$ probability, for every $M_nto infty$ as $ntoinfty$ (i.e., regardless of how slow $M$ goes to infinity).



      Now I have to proof the following proposition:




      Suppose that the posterior distribution $Pi(cdot|X^{(n)})$ contracts
      at rate $epsilon_n$ at $theta_0$. Then $hat{theta}_n$, defined as
      the center of a (nearly) samllest ball that contains posterior mass at
      least $frac{1}{2}$, satisfies $d(hattheta_n,theta_0) = O_P(epsilon_n)$ under $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$.




      $O_P(epsilon_n)$ is not defined but I suppose it denotes stochastic boundedness (see wikipedia), that is, for $tildeepsilon >0$, there are $M, N in mathbb{N}$ such that for $n>N$, we have $P_{theta_0}^{(n)} ( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n > M) ) < tildeepsilon$.



      The notes state the proof is very similar to a previous proof, which brought me to the following:



      Let $B(theta,r)$ be the closed ball of radius $r$ centered at $theta$. Define $hat{r}_n(theta) = inf{r:Pi_n(B(theta,r)|X^{(n)}) geq frac{1}{2}}$.



      Then $hat{r}_n(theta_0) < M_nepsilon_n$ with a probability tending to 1, with $M_n$ an arbitrary sequence with $M_n to infty$.



      As we have chosen $hattheta_n$ as a nearly smallest ball, certainly $hat{r}_n(hattheta_n) leq hat{r}_n(theta_0) + frac{1}{n} < M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n}$.



      Now, $B(theta_0,M_nepsilon_n)$ and $B(hattheta_n,hat{r}_n(hattheta_n))$ are not disjoint with probability tending to 1, since they would have a joined probability tending to 1.5. So:



      $d(theta_0,hattheta_n) < 2M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n} implies d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n < 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$,



      with probability tending to one. In other words, for $tildeepsilon >0$ there is some $N$ such that for $n>N$,



      $P_{theta_0}( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n geq 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n} ) < tildeepsilon$.



      However, if I understand stochastic boundedness correctly I need to somehow replace $2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$ with a fixed $M$. But since $M_n to infty$, I don't see how this is possible. Any ideas on what I could do?





      lecture notes










      share|cite|improve this question













      Consider a family of probability distributions $P_theta$ indexed by $theta in Theta$. The parameter space is endowed with some metric $d$. We assume that there is a true parameter $theta_0$, and we are interested of the convergence of the Bayesian posterior distribution, given a prior $Pi$. We denote the posterior distribution after $n$ samples by $Pi_n(cdot|X^{(n)})$.



      The posterior distribution is said to contract at rate $epsilon_n to 0$ at $theta_0$ if $Pi_n(theta:d(theta,theta_0) > M_nepsilon_n | X^{(n)}) to 0$ in $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$ probability, for every $M_nto infty$ as $ntoinfty$ (i.e., regardless of how slow $M$ goes to infinity).



      Now I have to proof the following proposition:




      Suppose that the posterior distribution $Pi(cdot|X^{(n)})$ contracts
      at rate $epsilon_n$ at $theta_0$. Then $hat{theta}_n$, defined as
      the center of a (nearly) samllest ball that contains posterior mass at
      least $frac{1}{2}$, satisfies $d(hattheta_n,theta_0) = O_P(epsilon_n)$ under $P_{theta_0}^{(n)}$.




      $O_P(epsilon_n)$ is not defined but I suppose it denotes stochastic boundedness (see wikipedia), that is, for $tildeepsilon >0$, there are $M, N in mathbb{N}$ such that for $n>N$, we have $P_{theta_0}^{(n)} ( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n > M) ) < tildeepsilon$.



      The notes state the proof is very similar to a previous proof, which brought me to the following:



      Let $B(theta,r)$ be the closed ball of radius $r$ centered at $theta$. Define $hat{r}_n(theta) = inf{r:Pi_n(B(theta,r)|X^{(n)}) geq frac{1}{2}}$.



      Then $hat{r}_n(theta_0) < M_nepsilon_n$ with a probability tending to 1, with $M_n$ an arbitrary sequence with $M_n to infty$.



      As we have chosen $hattheta_n$ as a nearly smallest ball, certainly $hat{r}_n(hattheta_n) leq hat{r}_n(theta_0) + frac{1}{n} < M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n}$.



      Now, $B(theta_0,M_nepsilon_n)$ and $B(hattheta_n,hat{r}_n(hattheta_n))$ are not disjoint with probability tending to 1, since they would have a joined probability tending to 1.5. So:



      $d(theta_0,hattheta_n) < 2M_nepsilon_n + frac{1}{n} implies d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n < 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$,



      with probability tending to one. In other words, for $tildeepsilon >0$ there is some $N$ such that for $n>N$,



      $P_{theta_0}( d(theta_0,hattheta_n)/epsilon_n geq 2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n} ) < tildeepsilon$.



      However, if I understand stochastic boundedness correctly I need to somehow replace $2M_n + frac{1}{epsilon_n n}$ with a fixed $M$. But since $M_n to infty$, I don't see how this is possible. Any ideas on what I could do?





      lecture notes







      bayesian






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked May 13 '17 at 14:45









      Scipio

      1458




      1458






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          I think you're almost there. $X_n=O_p(a_n)$ when $P( | frac{X_n}{a_n} | ge M_{delta} ) < delta$. $M_{delta}$ is affected by the choice of $delta$. In other notations you can also write $M_{delta}$ as $M_{n}$ where $n > N(delta)$ s.t $ni P( |frac{X_n}{a_n}| ge M_n ) < delta$.



          Bottom line is that in the definition of contraction rate, you could choose your $M_n$ as you please.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2279347%2fproving-stochastic-boundedness-in-rate-of-contraction-posterior-distribution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0














            I think you're almost there. $X_n=O_p(a_n)$ when $P( | frac{X_n}{a_n} | ge M_{delta} ) < delta$. $M_{delta}$ is affected by the choice of $delta$. In other notations you can also write $M_{delta}$ as $M_{n}$ where $n > N(delta)$ s.t $ni P( |frac{X_n}{a_n}| ge M_n ) < delta$.



            Bottom line is that in the definition of contraction rate, you could choose your $M_n$ as you please.






            share|cite|improve this answer


























              0














              I think you're almost there. $X_n=O_p(a_n)$ when $P( | frac{X_n}{a_n} | ge M_{delta} ) < delta$. $M_{delta}$ is affected by the choice of $delta$. In other notations you can also write $M_{delta}$ as $M_{n}$ where $n > N(delta)$ s.t $ni P( |frac{X_n}{a_n}| ge M_n ) < delta$.



              Bottom line is that in the definition of contraction rate, you could choose your $M_n$ as you please.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                0












                0








                0






                I think you're almost there. $X_n=O_p(a_n)$ when $P( | frac{X_n}{a_n} | ge M_{delta} ) < delta$. $M_{delta}$ is affected by the choice of $delta$. In other notations you can also write $M_{delta}$ as $M_{n}$ where $n > N(delta)$ s.t $ni P( |frac{X_n}{a_n}| ge M_n ) < delta$.



                Bottom line is that in the definition of contraction rate, you could choose your $M_n$ as you please.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                I think you're almost there. $X_n=O_p(a_n)$ when $P( | frac{X_n}{a_n} | ge M_{delta} ) < delta$. $M_{delta}$ is affected by the choice of $delta$. In other notations you can also write $M_{delta}$ as $M_{n}$ where $n > N(delta)$ s.t $ni P( |frac{X_n}{a_n}| ge M_n ) < delta$.



                Bottom line is that in the definition of contraction rate, you could choose your $M_n$ as you please.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 30 at 9:49









                user3373954

                1




                1






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2279347%2fproving-stochastic-boundedness-in-rate-of-contraction-posterior-distribution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Berounka

                    Sphinx de Gizeh

                    Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...