The asymmetry is load-bearing. KL(p ‖ q) punishes q for being small where p is large; the reverse punishes q for being large where p is small, and the two produce visibly different fits.
Used byI.13 · IV.5 · VII.5
0.IT.04
Mutual information
Statement
I(X; Y) = ℋ(X) − ℋ(X | Y) = KL(p(x, y) ‖ p(x)p(y)) ≥ 0, and is zero exactly when X ⫫ Y. It is symmetric.
Shape check
A scalar from a joint distribution over the pair.
Worked line
X a fair coin, Y = X: I = ℋ(X) = 1 bit. X and Y independent fair coins: I = 0.
Contrastive objectives are usually introduced as bounds on this quantity. The bound is loose, and the looseness is a function of batch size.
Used byIII.5 · V.2 · VII.3
0.IT.05
Jensen's inequality
Statement
For convex φ, φ(𝔼[X]) ≤ 𝔼[φ(X)]. For concave φ the inequality reverses. Applying it to log gives log 𝔼[X] ≥ 𝔼[log X].
Shape check
Both sides are scalars; the inequality is between them, not between shapes.
Worked line
X uniform on {1, 4}, φ(x) = x². φ(𝔼[X]) = 6.25 and 𝔼[φ(X)] = 8.5, so 6.25 ≤ 8.5.
The evidence lower bound is one application of the concave case to log p(x). Everything else in a variational derivation is bookkeeping around this step.