Over a million developers have joined DZone.
{{announcement.body}}
{{announcement.title}}

R: Think Bayes Euro Problem

DZone's Guide to

R: Think Bayes Euro Problem

· Performance Zone
Free Resource

Evolve your approach to Application Performance Monitoring by adopting five best practices that are outlined and explored in this e-book, brought to you in partnership with BMC.

I’ve got back to working my way through Think Bayes after a month’s break and started out with the one euro coin problem in Chapter 4:

A statistical statement appeared in “The Guardian” on Friday January 4, 2002:

When spun on edge 250 times, a Belgian one-euro coin came up heads 140 times and tails 110. ‘It looks very suspicious to me,’ said Barry Blight, a statistics lecturer at the London School of Economics. ‘If the coin were unbiased, the chance of getting a result as extreme as that would be less than 7%.’

But do these data give evidence that the coin is biased rather than fair?

We’re going to create a data frame with each row representing the probability that heads shows up that often. We need one row for each value between 0 (no heads) and 100 (all heads) and we’ll start with the assumption that each value can be chosen equally (a uniform prior):

library(dplyr)
 
values = seq(0, 100)
scores = rep(1.0 / length(values), length(values))  
df = data.frame(score = scores, value = values)
 
> df %>% sample_n(10)
         score value
60  0.00990099    59
101 0.00990099   100
10  0.00990099     9
41  0.00990099    40
2   0.00990099     1
83  0.00990099    82
44  0.00990099    43
97  0.00990099    96
100 0.00990099    99
12  0.00990099    11

Now we need to feed in our observations. We need to create a vector containing 140 heads and 110 tails. The ‘rep’ function comes in handy here:

observations = c(rep("T", times = 110), rep("H", times = 140))
> observations
  [1] "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T"
 [29] "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T"
 [57] "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T"
 [85] "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "T" "H" "H"
[113] "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H"
[141] "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H"
[169] "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H"
[197] "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H"
[225] "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H" "H"

Now we need to iterate over each of the observations and update our data frame appropriately.

for(observation in observations) {
  if(observation == "H") {
    df = df %>% mutate(score = score * (value / 100.0))
  } else {
    df = df %>% mutate(score = score * (1.0 - (value / 100.0)))
  }    
}
 
df = df %>% mutate(weighted = score / sum(score))

Now that we’ve done that we can calculate the maximum likelihood, mean, median and credible interval. We’ll create a ‘percentile’ function to help us out:

percentile = function(df, p) {
    df %>% filter(cumsum(weighted) > p) %>% head(1) %>% select(value) %>% as.numeric
}

And now let’s calculate the values:

# Maximum likelihood
> df %>% filter(weighted == max(weighted)) %>% select(value) %>% as.numeric
[1] 56
 
# Mean
> df %>% mutate(mean = value * weighted) %>% select(mean) %>% sum
[1] 55.95238
 
# Median
> percentile(df, 0.5)
[1] 56
 
# Credible Interval
percentage = 90
prob = (1 - percentage / 100.0) / 2
 
# lower
> percentile(df, prob)
[1] 51
 
# upper
> percentile(df, 1 - prob)
[1] 61

This all wraps up nicely into a function:

euro = function(values, priors, observations) {
  df = data.frame(score = priors, value = values)
 
  for(observation in observations) {
    if(observation == "H") {
      df = df %>% mutate(score = score * (value / 100.0))
    } else {
      df = df %>% mutate(score = score * (1.0 - (value / 100.0)))
    }    
  }
 
  return(df %>% mutate(weighted = score / sum(score)))
}

which we can call like so:

values = seq(0,100)
priors = rep(1.0 / length(values), length(values))
observations = c(rep("T", times = 110), rep("H", times = 140))
df = euro(values, priors, observations)

The next part of the problem requires us to change the prior distribution to be more weighted to values close to 50%. We can tweak the parameters we pass into the function accordingly:

values = seq(0,100)
priors = sapply(values, function(x) ifelse(x < 50, x, 100 - x))
priors = priors / sum(priors)
observations = c(rep("T", times = 110), rep("H", times = 140))
df = euro(values, priors, observations)

In fact even with the adjusted priors we still end up with the same posterior distribution:

> df %>% filter(weighted == max(weighted)) %>% select(value) %>% as.numeric
[1] 56
 
> df %>% mutate(mean = value * weighted) %>% select(mean) %>% sum
[1] 55.7435
 
> percentile(df, 0.5)
[1] 56
 
> percentile(df, 0.05)
[1] 51
 
> percentile(df, 0.95)
[1] 61


Learn tips and best practices for optimizing your capacity management strategy with the Market Guide for Capacity Management, brought to you in partnership with BMC.

Topics:

Published at DZone with permission of Mark Needham, DZone MVB. See the original article here.

Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.

THE DZONE NEWSLETTER

Dev Resources & Solutions Straight to Your Inbox

Thanks for subscribing!

Awesome! Check your inbox to verify your email so you can start receiving the latest in tech news and resources.

X

{{ parent.title || parent.header.title}}

{{ parent.tldr }}

{{ parent.urlSource.name }}