Inconsistency with "embedded" CPT
Issue #11
closed
Originally reported on Google Code with ID 11
Consider the following CPT example in Leapp;
x = ?:(1/3)
y = ?:(1/4)
z1 = ?! ( ~x & ~y -> ?:(1/5),
~x & y -> ?:(1/7),
x & ~y -> ?:(1/2),
x & y -> ?:(1/2))
Notice that z1 is independent of y when x is true (i.e. "context-specific Independence").
Then, in the following refactoring
z0 = ?! ( ~y -> ?:(1/5),
y -> ?:(1/7))
z3 = ?! ( ~x -> z0,
x -> ?:(1/2))
z3 is expected to be equivalent to z1.
However the two distributions unexpectedly differ:
lea> :@ z1 ! y
11/42
lea> :@ z3 ! y
8/21
Reported by pde@n-side.com
on 2015-03-14 13:53:52
Comments (6)
-
Account Deleted -
repo owner - changed status to closed
-
repo owner Replace Blea.build arg 'requiresCtx' by 'ctxType', which allows for 0, 1, 2 values; fix regression for embedded CPT (refs
#11)→ <<cset 2a337b9521b9>>
-
repo owner Put a control on Tlea to forbid cascaded constructs, which give wrong results due to probability representation as integers (see issue
#11)→ <<cset be430b1bffac>>
-
repo owner Replace Blea.build arg 'requiresCtx' by 'ctxType', which allows for 0, 1, 2 values; fix regression for embedded CPT (refs
#11)→ <<cset 970882434d79>>
-
repo owner Put a control on Tlea to forbid cascaded constructs, which give wrong results due to probability representation as integers (see issue
#11)→ <<cset 779b9777a28b>>
- Log in to comment
Reported by
pde@n-side.com
on 2015-03-18 00:17:30 - Status changed:Verified