Kalman smoother equations












1












$begingroup$


I'm trying to find the Kalman filter equations, i.e $mathbb{E}[X_k mid y_0,...,y_n]$ with $k lt n$ by figuring out the law of the the density $p(x_k mid y_0,...,y_n)$ under the Hidden Markov Chain Model ($X_k$ is a markov chain and conditionally on $(X_{0:n}=(X_0,...,X_n))$, the observations $(Y_{0:n})$ are independent and the observations $i$ only depends on the hidden state $X_i$ :
begin{equation}
p(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=p(x_0)prod_{i=1}^n p(x_i mid x_{i-1}) prod_{i=0}^n p(x_i mid y_i)
end{equation}

The thing is, i'm struggling with a preliminary question: that is to prove :
begin{equation}
p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:n})=p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:k})
end{equation}

Anyone know how to prove it?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    I'm trying to find the Kalman filter equations, i.e $mathbb{E}[X_k mid y_0,...,y_n]$ with $k lt n$ by figuring out the law of the the density $p(x_k mid y_0,...,y_n)$ under the Hidden Markov Chain Model ($X_k$ is a markov chain and conditionally on $(X_{0:n}=(X_0,...,X_n))$, the observations $(Y_{0:n})$ are independent and the observations $i$ only depends on the hidden state $X_i$ :
    begin{equation}
    p(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=p(x_0)prod_{i=1}^n p(x_i mid x_{i-1}) prod_{i=0}^n p(x_i mid y_i)
    end{equation}

    The thing is, i'm struggling with a preliminary question: that is to prove :
    begin{equation}
    p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:n})=p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:k})
    end{equation}

    Anyone know how to prove it?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      I'm trying to find the Kalman filter equations, i.e $mathbb{E}[X_k mid y_0,...,y_n]$ with $k lt n$ by figuring out the law of the the density $p(x_k mid y_0,...,y_n)$ under the Hidden Markov Chain Model ($X_k$ is a markov chain and conditionally on $(X_{0:n}=(X_0,...,X_n))$, the observations $(Y_{0:n})$ are independent and the observations $i$ only depends on the hidden state $X_i$ :
      begin{equation}
      p(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=p(x_0)prod_{i=1}^n p(x_i mid x_{i-1}) prod_{i=0}^n p(x_i mid y_i)
      end{equation}

      The thing is, i'm struggling with a preliminary question: that is to prove :
      begin{equation}
      p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:n})=p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:k})
      end{equation}

      Anyone know how to prove it?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I'm trying to find the Kalman filter equations, i.e $mathbb{E}[X_k mid y_0,...,y_n]$ with $k lt n$ by figuring out the law of the the density $p(x_k mid y_0,...,y_n)$ under the Hidden Markov Chain Model ($X_k$ is a markov chain and conditionally on $(X_{0:n}=(X_0,...,X_n))$, the observations $(Y_{0:n})$ are independent and the observations $i$ only depends on the hidden state $X_i$ :
      begin{equation}
      p(x_{0:n},y_{0:n})=p(x_0)prod_{i=1}^n p(x_i mid x_{i-1}) prod_{i=0}^n p(x_i mid y_i)
      end{equation}

      The thing is, i'm struggling with a preliminary question: that is to prove :
      begin{equation}
      p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:n})=p(x_{0:k} mid x_{k+1}, y_{0:k})
      end{equation}

      Anyone know how to prove it?







      statistics kalman-filter






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 17 '18 at 10:07









      yjntyjnt

      113




      113






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          I don't have the reputation to put this as a comment, so I post as an answer.



          It follows from the Markov assumptions. The past, $x_{0:k}$, is independent of the future given the present, $x_{k+1}$.



          If you draw the graphical model it may be easier to see. Given $x_{k+1}$, $x_{0:k}$ is "blocked" from $y_{k+1}$ and every observation afterwards.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
            $endgroup$
            – grxxvytony
            Feb 8 at 23:58











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043761%2fkalman-smoother-equations%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          I don't have the reputation to put this as a comment, so I post as an answer.



          It follows from the Markov assumptions. The past, $x_{0:k}$, is independent of the future given the present, $x_{k+1}$.



          If you draw the graphical model it may be easier to see. Given $x_{k+1}$, $x_{0:k}$ is "blocked" from $y_{k+1}$ and every observation afterwards.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
            $endgroup$
            – grxxvytony
            Feb 8 at 23:58
















          1












          $begingroup$

          I don't have the reputation to put this as a comment, so I post as an answer.



          It follows from the Markov assumptions. The past, $x_{0:k}$, is independent of the future given the present, $x_{k+1}$.



          If you draw the graphical model it may be easier to see. Given $x_{k+1}$, $x_{0:k}$ is "blocked" from $y_{k+1}$ and every observation afterwards.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
            $endgroup$
            – grxxvytony
            Feb 8 at 23:58














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          I don't have the reputation to put this as a comment, so I post as an answer.



          It follows from the Markov assumptions. The past, $x_{0:k}$, is independent of the future given the present, $x_{k+1}$.



          If you draw the graphical model it may be easier to see. Given $x_{k+1}$, $x_{0:k}$ is "blocked" from $y_{k+1}$ and every observation afterwards.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          I don't have the reputation to put this as a comment, so I post as an answer.



          It follows from the Markov assumptions. The past, $x_{0:k}$, is independent of the future given the present, $x_{k+1}$.



          If you draw the graphical model it may be easier to see. Given $x_{k+1}$, $x_{0:k}$ is "blocked" from $y_{k+1}$ and every observation afterwards.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Feb 8 at 19:26









          grxxvytonygrxxvytony

          442




          442












          • $begingroup$
            @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
            $endgroup$
            – grxxvytony
            Feb 8 at 23:58


















          • $begingroup$
            @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
            $endgroup$
            – grxxvytony
            Feb 8 at 23:58
















          $begingroup$
          @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
          $endgroup$
          – grxxvytony
          Feb 8 at 23:58




          $begingroup$
          @Leucippus: I believe it does answer the OP's question on how to prove the result. If the OP requires clarification, then the OP should tell me -- not you.
          $endgroup$
          – grxxvytony
          Feb 8 at 23:58


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3043761%2fkalman-smoother-equations%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Plaza Victoria

          Brian Clough

          Cáceres