klderivation

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision		 Previous revision
klderivation [2024/12/24 12:49] – [Assumption 2: Restrictions on the cost function] pedroortegaklderivation [2024/12/24 12:58] (current) – [Connecting to the free energy objective] pedroortega
Line 65: Line 65:
 ===== Cost of deliberation ===== ===== Cost of deliberation =====
  
-Now, let's calculate the cost of transforming the prior choice probabilities into posterior choice probabilities:+Now, based on our sketch above, let's calculate the cost of transforming the prior choice probabilities into posterior choice probabilities:
 \[ \[
   \begin{align}   \begin{align}
Line 82: Line 82:
 We've obtained two expectation terms. The second is proportional to the Kullback-Leibler divergence between of the posterior to the prior choice probabilities. What is the first expectation? We've obtained two expectation terms. The second is proportional to the Kullback-Leibler divergence between of the posterior to the prior choice probabilities. What is the first expectation?
  
-The first expectation represents the expected cost of each individual choice. This is because each term $C(x \cap d|x \cap c)$ measures the cost of transforming the relative probability of a specific choice.+The first expectation represents the expected cost of each individual choice (if each choice were to occur deterministically). This is because each term $C(x \cap d|x \cap c)$ measures the cost of transforming the relative probability of a specific choice.
  
 ===== Connecting to the free energy objective ===== ===== Connecting to the free energy objective =====
Line 88: Line 88:
 We can transform the above equality into a variational principle by replacing the individual choice costs $C(x \cap d|x \cap c)$ with arbitrary numbers. The resulting expression is convex in the posterior choice probabilities $P(x|d)$, so we get a nice and clean objective function with a unique minimum. We can transform the above equality into a variational principle by replacing the individual choice costs $C(x \cap d|x \cap c)$ with arbitrary numbers. The resulting expression is convex in the posterior choice probabilities $P(x|d)$, so we get a nice and clean objective function with a unique minimum.
  
-We can even go a step further: by multiplying the expression by $-1$, we can treat the costs as utilities, obtaining+We can even go a step further: noticing that the variational problem is translationally invariant in the costs, and multiplying the expression by $-1$, we can treat the resulting "negative costs plus a constant" as utilities, obtaining
 \[ \[
   \sum_x P(x|d) U(x) - \frac{1}{\beta} \sum_x P(x|d) \log \frac{ P(x|d) }{ P(x|c) }.   \sum_x P(x|d) U(x) - \frac{1}{\beta} \sum_x P(x|d) \log \frac{ P(x|d) }{ P(x|c) }.
  • klderivation.1735044550.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2024/12/24 12:49
  • by pedroortega