Skip to content

Clarification of Computing Likelihood? #4

Description

@RylanSchaeffer

I have two questions about this line of code:

https://github.com/csmfindling/behavior_models/blob/master/models/expSmoothing_prevAction.py#L52

  1. If I'm understanding correctly, the goal is to compute a likelihood to combine with prior formed from the exponentially smoothed history of actions. The likelihood that is needed is specifically p(observation | stimulus side = right) so that we can end up with a posterior p(stimulus side = right | observations). However, this code seems to compute p(observation < 0 | signed stimulus contrast strength). Are the two distributions equivalent? I would think not, but if they aren't interchangeable, why is p(observation < 0 | signed stimulus contrast strength) the correct likelihood?

I would think that if the model assumes the mouse knows the true signed stimulus contrasts strengths and their variances, then the mouse should compute \sum_{signed stimulus contrast strength} p(o|signed stimulus contrast strength) p(signed stimulus contrast strength | stimulus side = right)

  1. Why don't the minimum and maximum truncations introduce truncation errors?

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions