Definition
Shannon originally wrote down the following formula for the entropy of a continuous distribution, known as differential entropy:
Unlike Shannon's formula for the discrete entropy, however, this is not the result of any derivation (Shannon simply replaced the summation symbol in the discrete version with an integral) and it turns out to lack many of the properties that make the discrete entropy a useful measure of uncertainty. In particular, it is not invariant under a change of variables and can even become negative.
Jaynes (1963, 1968) argued that the formula for the continuous entropy should be derived by taking the limit of increasingly dense discrete distributions. Suppose that we have a set of discrete points, such that in the limit their density approaches a function called the invariant measure.
Jaynes derived from this the following formula for the continuous entropy, which he argued should be taken as the correct formula:
It is formally similar to but conceptually distinct from the (negative of the) Kullback–Leibler divergence or relative entropy, which is comparison measure between two probability distributions. The formula for the Kullback-Leibler divergence is similar, except that the invariant measure is replaced by a second probability density function . In Jaynes' formula, is not a probability density but simply a density. In particular it does not have to be normalised so as to sum to 1.
Jaynes' continuous entropy formula and the relative entropy share the property of being invariant under a change of variables, which solves many of the difficulties that come from applying Shannon's continuous entropy formula.
It is the inclusion of the invariant measure that ensures the formula's invariance under a change of variables, since both and must be transformed in the same way.
Read more about this topic: Limiting Density Of Discrete Points
Famous quotes containing the word definition:
“Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
—Walter Pater (1839–1894)
“Scientific method is the way to truth, but it affords, even in
principle, no unique definition of truth. Any so-called pragmatic
definition of truth is doomed to failure equally.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)
“It is very hard to give a just definition of love. The most we can say of it is this: that in the soul, it is a desire to rule; in the spirit, it is a sympathy; and in the body, it is but a hidden and subtle desire to possess—after many mysteries—what one loves.”
—François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680)