Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am learning about mutual information, and am confused about one of the definitions. Mutual information is defined as $ I(X;Y) = H(X) - H(X | Y) $

where,

$$ H(X) = \sum_{x} p(x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} ,$$

and similarly,

$$ H(X|Y) = \sum_{x,y} p(x,y) \log \frac{1}{p(x|y)} $$

where $H(X)$ is concerned we can then say that,

$$ \begin{align*} \sum_x p(x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} &= \sum_x \left( (p(x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)}) \sum_y p(y|x) \right) \\ &= \sum_{x,y} p(x)p(y|x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} = \\ &= \sum_{x,y} p(x,y) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} \end{align*} $$

because $ \sum \limits_y p(y|x) = 1 $ for any $x$.

I believe this is how the derivation is supposed to go, and combined with $H(X|Y)$ eventually leads to the canonical equation,

$$\sum_{x,y} p(x,y) \log \frac{p(x,y)}{p(x)p(y)} .$$

But it seems to me that it is equally true to say that,

$$ \begin{align*} \sum_{x} p(x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} &= \sum_{x} \left\{ ( p(x) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} ) \sum_{y} p(y) \right\} \\ &= \sum_{x,y} p(x)p(y) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} \end{align*} $$

because we also have $ \sum_{y} p(y) = 1 $ by definition.

The problem I'm having is that this latter version implies that,

$$\sum_{x,y} p(x,y) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} = \sum_{x,y} p(x)p(y) \log \frac{1}{p(x)} $$

which implies that $ p(x,y) = p(x)p(y) $ which also implies that $X$ and $Y$ are independent. I know this last conclusion is false, because it means there would never be any mutual information and thus that this metric would be pointless, but I can't figure out where I'm going wrong. It would be great to have someone point out the mistake I am making in the latter case.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Your formula $$\sum_{x,y}p(x,y)\log \frac{1}{p(x)} = \sum_{x,y}p(x)p(y)\log \frac{1}{p(x)}$$ is indeed correct, since you can always average out $y$ because $p(x)$ does obviously not depend on $y$. Howvever, it does not imply that $p(x,y) = p(x)p(y)$ ($2 -2 = 1 -1 = 0$, but not $1=2$).

share|improve this answer
    
Oh geeez... I'm not sure whether to be happy or feel even more retarded. In any case thanks a bunch for pointing out what should have been obvious. I've marked your answer as correct, but I don't have enough reputation to upvote you. –  user20314 Nov 29 '11 at 11:30
    
I so know the feeling :). In any case, you're welcome. Happy to be of help. –  fabee Nov 29 '11 at 19:41

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.