Trivial because of
exponential
Look
at the handout given in class for a detailed proof.
In
summary, at the end of the day, sites without s cancel.
Back to the Image Segmentation Problem
Our
image model
true image f
line process l not observed
Goal
The line process estimate
solves the image segmentation problem.
The true image estimate
solves the image restoration problem.
Both problems are simultaneously
solved!
Our
model assumes:
Our
solution:
prior distribution
Interesting
term:
Where we assume every pixel has independent
noise h ~ N ( m , s )
e.g. Poisson process noise in CCDs
Result:
is the posterior probability of a
particular f, l given g. Note this is also a Gibbs distribution!
If you insist on a single answer
then return f*, l* that maximizes
or equivalently, minimizes the energy
function
Problem: f , l space is very large!!
Solution: Construct
samples of f , l in this space with high probablity
Technique: Markov
Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) lets you sample the posterior distribution
Q: How
do we represent a probability distribution with sampling?
A: Create
many samples drawn from that distribution and count!
Example:
Q: P(X
> 17) = ?
A: Create
samples Xi drawn from the distribution of X.
Count
the number of samples greater than 17 and divide by total number of samples.
Primitive random number generator X ~
U(0,1).
To create Y ~ U(a,b) use
Y = a + ( b – a ) X
In general we can use the cumulative
distribution function
1987 – Stochastic Simulation
(Ripley) for generating samples for “standard stuff” in textbooks
Example:
This transition probabilities can be written as a
matrix
If we write the probability
distribution at time t as p(t) then
p(t+1) = p(t)P
For example if the drunk’s walk
starts at position 2 we denote
p( t = 0 ) = [0 1 0 0]
p(t) is an evolving probability
distribution which is a row vector that sums to one
The equilibrium distribution p(infinity)
= p satisfies
pP = p
and is a left eigenvector of P with
eigenvalue one.
Metropolis Sampler – Rosenberg,
Teller, Teller
Heat Bath ( Gibbs Sampler ) – “rapidly
mixing” determines convergence rate
We are given that the posterior
distribution is of the form f(x)/Z
1.
We
have a proposal kernal satisfying K(x,y) = K(y,x)
2.
Calculate
f(y)
3.
Accept
transition with probability = min {1, f(y)/f(x) }
4.
This
eventually converges to the “right thing”