Is Kullback-Leibler Divergennce not equal to Relative Entropy?












0












$begingroup$


In many books, Kullback-Leibler Divergence is equal to Relative Entropy.
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i).
$$

However, I find in the book, Convex Optimization (Stephen Boyd) page 90, the KL Divergence is defined as,
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i)-u_i+v_i).
$$

Why KL Divergence has these two different definition? Which one is correct?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45
















0












$begingroup$


In many books, Kullback-Leibler Divergence is equal to Relative Entropy.
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i).
$$

However, I find in the book, Convex Optimization (Stephen Boyd) page 90, the KL Divergence is defined as,
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i)-u_i+v_i).
$$

Why KL Divergence has these two different definition? Which one is correct?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45














0












0








0





$begingroup$


In many books, Kullback-Leibler Divergence is equal to Relative Entropy.
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i).
$$

However, I find in the book, Convex Optimization (Stephen Boyd) page 90, the KL Divergence is defined as,
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i)-u_i+v_i).
$$

Why KL Divergence has these two different definition? Which one is correct?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




In many books, Kullback-Leibler Divergence is equal to Relative Entropy.
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i).
$$

However, I find in the book, Convex Optimization (Stephen Boyd) page 90, the KL Divergence is defined as,
$$
D_{kl}(u,v) = sum_{i=1}^n(u_ilog(u_i/v_i)-u_i+v_i).
$$

Why KL Divergence has these two different definition? Which one is correct?







convex-optimization machine-learning information-theory






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:36









AlanAlan

32




32








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45








1




1




$begingroup$
The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
$endgroup$
– LinAlg
Dec 20 '18 at 2:45




$begingroup$
The book (also written by Vandenberghe) clearly mentions "Note that the relative entropy and the Kullback-Leibler divergence are the same when u and v are probability vectors, i.e., satisfy 1Tu = 1Tv = 1.)"
$endgroup$
– LinAlg
Dec 20 '18 at 2:45










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

They're equivalent because $sum_i u_i=sum_i v_i=1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thank you so much.
    $endgroup$
    – Alan
    Dec 19 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45












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%2f3046947%2fis-kullback-leibler-divergennce-not-equal-to-relative-entropy%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












$begingroup$

They're equivalent because $sum_i u_i=sum_i v_i=1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thank you so much.
    $endgroup$
    – Alan
    Dec 19 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45
















1












$begingroup$

They're equivalent because $sum_i u_i=sum_i v_i=1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    thank you so much.
    $endgroup$
    – Alan
    Dec 19 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45














1












1








1





$begingroup$

They're equivalent because $sum_i u_i=sum_i v_i=1$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



They're equivalent because $sum_i u_i=sum_i v_i=1$.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 19 '18 at 23:00









J.G.J.G.

32.6k23250




32.6k23250












  • $begingroup$
    thank you so much.
    $endgroup$
    – Alan
    Dec 19 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45


















  • $begingroup$
    thank you so much.
    $endgroup$
    – Alan
    Dec 19 '18 at 23:15










  • $begingroup$
    equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
    $endgroup$
    – LinAlg
    Dec 20 '18 at 2:45
















$begingroup$
thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Alan
Dec 19 '18 at 23:15




$begingroup$
thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Alan
Dec 19 '18 at 23:15












$begingroup$
equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
$endgroup$
– LinAlg
Dec 20 '18 at 2:45




$begingroup$
equivalent only for probability vectors, as the book mentions
$endgroup$
– LinAlg
Dec 20 '18 at 2:45


















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%2f3046947%2fis-kullback-leibler-divergennce-not-equal-to-relative-entropy%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

In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...