Algorithmic statistics: normal objects and universal models

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Abstract

Kolmogorov suggested to measure quality of a statistical hypothesis PP for a data xx by two parameters: Kolmogorov complexity C(P)C(P) of the hypothesis and the probability P(x)P(x) of xx with respect to PP. P. Gács, J. Tromp, P.M.B. Vitányi discovered a small class of models that are universal in the following sense. Each hypothesis SijS_{ij} from that class is identified by two integer parameters i,ji,j and for every data xx and for each complexity level αα there is a hypothesis SijS_{ij} with j≤i≤l(x)j\le i\le l(x) of complexity at most αα that has almost the best fit among all hypotheses of complexity at most αα. The hypothesis SijS_{ij} is identified by ii and the leading i−ji-j bits of the binary representation of the number of strings of complexity at most ii. On the other hand, the initial data xx might be completely irrelevant to the the number of strings of complexity at most ii. Thus SijS_{ij} seems to have some information irrelevant to the data, which undermines Kolmogorov's approach: the best hypotheses should not have irrelevant information. To restrict the class of hypotheses for a data xx to those that have only relevant information, Vereshchagin introduced a notion of a strong model for xx: those are models for xx whose total conditional complexity conditional to xx is negligible. An object xx is called normal if for each complexity level αα at least one its best fitting model of that complexity is strong. In this paper we show that there are "many types" of normal strings. Our second result states that there is a normal object xx such that all its best fitting models SijS_{ij} are not strong for xx. Our last result states that every best fit strong model for a normal object is again a normal object.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.