<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: An example of chi2 bias in fitting the X-ray spectra.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/</link>
	<description>Weaving together Astronomy+Statistics+Computer Science+Engineering+Intrumentation, far beyond the growing borders</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:23:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: hlee</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-798</link>
		<dc:creator>hlee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-798</guid>
		<description>Details about this bias can be found from &lt;a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...518..380M" rel="nofollow"&gt;Parameter Estimation in Astronomy with Poisson-Distribution Data I. The &#967;&lt;sub&gt;r&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; Statistics&lt;/a&gt; by K.J. Mighell (1999ApJ...518..380). I overlooked references in &lt;a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...548..224V" rel="nofollow"&gt;Analysis of Energy Spectra with Low Photon Counts via Bayesian Posterior Simulation&lt;/a&gt; by van Dyk et al (2001ApJ...548..224). I wish that reference lists in astronomical publication include the titles so as to infer the significance of citation. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Details about this bias can be found from <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1999ApJ...518..380M" rel="nofollow">Parameter Estimation in Astronomy with Poisson-Distribution Data I. The &#967;<sub>r</sub><sup>2</sup> Statistics</a> by K.J. Mighell (1999ApJ&#8230;518..380). I overlooked references in <a href="http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001ApJ...548..224V" rel="nofollow">Analysis of Energy Spectra with Low Photon Counts via Bayesian Posterior Simulation</a> by van Dyk et al (2001ApJ&#8230;548..224). I wish that reference lists in astronomical publication include the titles so as to infer the significance of citation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jk</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-131</link>
		<dc:creator>jk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:42:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-131</guid>
		<description>If you are willing to assume a likelihood, the optimal estimator is the one that maximizes the likelihood function, denoted the MLE.  It is optimal in terms of efficiency ( the asymptotic variance of your estimator ).  It is not, however, always going to be unbiased.  However, under mild regularity conditions, the MLE is consistent, which is essentially the same as being asymptotically unbiased.  If the bias is determined to be an issue, sometimes the bias can be easily corrected, take for example using s^2 to estimate sigma^2 for the case of i.i.d. normal data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you are willing to assume a likelihood, the optimal estimator is the one that maximizes the likelihood function, denoted the MLE.  It is optimal in terms of efficiency ( the asymptotic variance of your estimator ).  It is not, however, always going to be unbiased.  However, under mild regularity conditions, the MLE is consistent, which is essentially the same as being asymptotically unbiased.  If the bias is determined to be an issue, sometimes the bias can be easily corrected, take for example using s^2 to estimate sigma^2 for the case of i.i.d. normal data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aneta</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-129</link>
		<dc:creator>aneta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 01:10:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-129</guid>
		<description>This is also described in Lupton book on Statistic for Astronomers in the section
on the ML estimators.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is also described in Lupton book on Statistic for Astronomers in the section<br />
on the ML estimators.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hlee</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-128</link>
		<dc:creator>hlee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:17:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-128</guid>
		<description>1. The optimal estimator: Can I take that as BLUE (best linear unbiased estimator)? 
2. Sad and glad that it's already done. The plot and Loredo's work should go more public.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. The optimal estimator: Can I take that as BLUE (best linear unbiased estimator)?<br />
2. Sad and glad that it&#8217;s already done. The plot and Loredo&#8217;s work should go more public.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pef</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-127</link>
		<dc:creator>pef</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 13:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-127</guid>
		<description>Ah.

Tom L: if you're reading this, you really should've published those notes :)

The short version: the optimal estimator for the photon index is the maximum
likelihood estimator.  If the data are binned, and the total number of counts over
all bins is not fixed (i.e., is a random variable), then the likelihood function is

\Prod_{i=1}^k \frac{ (np_i)^{y_i} }{ y_i ! } e^{-np_i}

where y_i are the number of counts in bin i, n = \sum_i y_i, and p_i is the probability
that a count would be recorded in bin i (and this depends on the distribution
parameter, in this case the photon index).

You can derive the \chi^2 function from this using Stirling's approximation 
(np_i \gtrsim 5 in each bin) and then a Taylor series expansion.  Depending on
how you do that expansion, you can derive either \chi^2 with model variance
or \chi^2 with data variance.  It's the combination of Stirling's approximation
with how you cut off the Taylor expansion that creates the bias term.

Tom Loredo wrote this all up years and years ago, so I take no credit for the
explanation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah.</p>
<p>Tom L: if you&#8217;re reading this, you really should&#8217;ve published those notes <img src='http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The short version: the optimal estimator for the photon index is the maximum<br />
likelihood estimator.  If the data are binned, and the total number of counts over<br />
all bins is not fixed (i.e., is a random variable), then the likelihood function is</p>
<p>\Prod_{i=1}^k \frac{ (np_i)^{y_i} }{ y_i ! } e^{-np_i}</p>
<p>where y_i are the number of counts in bin i, n = \sum_i y_i, and p_i is the probability<br />
that a count would be recorded in bin i (and this depends on the distribution<br />
parameter, in this case the photon index).</p>
<p>You can derive the \chi^2 function from this using Stirling&#8217;s approximation<br />
(np_i \gtrsim 5 in each bin) and then a Taylor series expansion.  Depending on<br />
how you do that expansion, you can derive either \chi^2 with model variance<br />
or \chi^2 with data variance.  It&#8217;s the combination of Stirling&#8217;s approximation<br />
with how you cut off the Taylor expansion that creates the bias term.</p>
<p>Tom Loredo wrote this all up years and years ago, so I take no credit for the<br />
explanation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hlee</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-126</link>
		<dc:creator>hlee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:17:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-126</guid>
		<description>Some sort of expansion like Taylor could characterize the bias term. Cash stat (maximum likelihood estimator) is asymptotically unbiased under mild regularity conditions but I do not think the best fit from the chi-sq function is. I guess there are ways to introduce penalized likelihoods to reduce bias (get rid of bias) designed for astronomers to get unbiased best fits. It will take time to build a connection between physical intuition and mathematical formalism, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some sort of expansion like Taylor could characterize the bias term. Cash stat (maximum likelihood estimator) is asymptotically unbiased under mild regularity conditions but I do not think the best fit from the chi-sq function is. I guess there are ways to introduce penalized likelihoods to reduce bias (get rid of bias) designed for astronomers to get unbiased best fits. It will take time to build a connection between physical intuition and mathematical formalism, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vlk</title>
		<link>http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/comment-page-1/#comment-125</link>
		<dc:creator>vlk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 22:06:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://groundtruth.info/AstroStat/slog/2007/an-example-of-chi2-bias-in-fitting-the-x-ray-spectra/#comment-125</guid>
		<description>Any idea what is the primal cause of this bias?  How would one understand this from a physical viewpoint?  i.e., how to build intuition about it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any idea what is the primal cause of this bias?  How would one understand this from a physical viewpoint?  i.e., how to build intuition about it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
