How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Finite-model posterior probabilities and Bayes-factor odds
Statement
Assume the finite dominated model setup of Marginal likelihoods, proper model evidence, and Bayes factors. Fix a data value such that for every . A version of the posterior model probabilities at this fiber is For any two models , the posterior odds satisfy The displayed version uses the specified jointly measurable density representatives; no quotient is formed if an evidence is zero or infinite.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The finite collection of proper model priors, the common sigma-finite data measure, specified jointly measurable likelihood densities, positive model weights, and a data fiber where every model evidence is finite and positive.
Each is the evidence integral against the proper within-model prior, and is defined when both evidence values are finite positive. Marginal likelihoods, proper model evidence, and Bayes factors
A likelihood-weighted measure has a finite positive normalization exactly when its evidence is finite and positive. Fiberwise posterior propriety is equivalent to finite positive evidence
For a proper parameter prior and a probability kernel with a specified jointly measurable density, the quotient by the prior-predictive density on finite positive fibers is a regular conditional law. Bayes formula for dominated kernels
For a finite partition and a positive-probability data event, Bayes' formula gives posterior cell probability as prior cell probability times conditional event probability divided by the total event probability. Bayes' theorem over a finite partition
Separate parameter-indexed likelihood-density versions do not by themselves assert joint measurability in parameter and data; this theorem requires the joint measurability separately. Likelihood densities
Proof
Proof technique: form the finite disjoint-union parameter model, apply the dominated-kernel Bayes formula, and take the image on the model index.
Given: The hypotheses in the Statement.
Form the measurable disjoint union and put , where . This is a probability measure because each is a probability measure and the finite weights sum to one. On use the observation kernel with density . Each section is a probability kernel, and finite piecewise measurability plus the stipulated joint measurability makes a specified jointly measurable density; [F5] warns that separate density versions alone would not suffice. Its prior-predictive density is . The given finite-positive hypotheses make finite and positive, so [F2] confirms its likelihood-weighted prior has a probability normalization.
Apply [F3] to and this dominated observation kernel. Define its global posterior kernel by the normalized likelihood-weighted prior on and by the fixed prior on , exactly as in [F3]. The set is measurable, and [F3] states that has predictive probability zero. At the specified fiber, where every model evidence is finite and positive, this posterior kernel assigns the tagged slice mass . The model-index map is measurable, so the image of this regular conditional law is the stated posterior model probability.
For any measurable data event with positive predictive probability, the global kernel in step 2.1 has the event identity by [F3]. The integral on the left means integration against the predictive measure , so no product with an infinite density on an exceptional fiber is evaluated pointwise. Dividing by the event probability agrees with [F4]. This event identity uses the global kernel, whereas the displayed odds claim only concerns the given finite-positive fiber. At that fiber, divide the positive finite probabilities from step 2.1 for and ; [F1] gives .
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
20 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Andrew Gelman et al., Bayesian Data Analysis, 3rd ed., §7.4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Alicia A. Johnson, Miles Q. Ott, and Mine Dogucu, Bayes Rules!, Chapter 8, §8.2.1 (standard reference, not scraped)