Sample Spaces, Events, and Naive Probability

Probability is based on the mathematical concept of sets, from which we’ll steal some jargon. Let’s imagine an example to ground this.

Say there are 1000 spiders in a bag. One of those spiders happens to have a red dot on their thorax. You pull a single spider out of that bag, without looking. You could have either pulled A) a spider with no red dot, or B) the spider with the red dot. What is the probability that you have selected the spider with the red dot?

In our brief description of our question here, we’ve already touched on each of our key terms and concepts. First, we’ve actually defined the sample space (the set of all possible outcomes of an experiment/trial) as being finite – the spiders in the bag that we can think of as a mathematical set. The population (related but different to a sample space) is the set of all units that some random process can select. Sample spaces can be finite, countably infinite, or uncountably infinite. Most biological applications, and all the applications we’ll consider here, have finite sample spaces. That is to say, we can construct a set containing every single outcome of an experiment or random trial. In this example, each spider represents an outcome, and an event is some set of spiders. Side note: sets can have one or even no items in them. The events are what we would mathematically consider subsets of the sample space. So here we have two events of interest: The subset A) 999 spiders with no red dots, and B) 1 spider with a red dot.

Here, we have a simple version of a probability, wherein we can actually just define the probability of choosing the spider with the red dot as a simple proportion. To state this clearly, the probability of performing the experiment, and the B) being the outcome can be defined as:

[P(\text{B}) = \frac{\text{number of outcomes favourable to B}}{\text{Total number of outcomes in the sample space }\textit{S}}

which specifically means:

P(\text{B}) = \frac{\text{number of spiders with red dots}}{\text{total number of spiders in }\textit{S}}

Or

P(\text{B}) = \frac{1}{1000}
\\
P(\text{B}) = 0.001

P(B)=0.001P(B)=0.001 Now, to add more conditions, we’re assuming here that when we put our hand into the bag to select a spider, there are absolutely no defining features that make one spider more or less likely to be chosen. However, there is a case where some spiders are bigger, or perhaps less afraid of the hand coming into the bag, and these traits may make some spiders more or less likely to be chosen.

This is easy enough to replicate in R, as it’s simply a division calculation:

size_b = 1
size_sample_space = 1000
prob_b = size_b / size_sample_space

# show the result
prob_b

## [1] 0.001

Two Events

We can now see clearly that all of the spiders (i.e. all of SS) is contained within the two event subsets AA and BB. Further, there are actually no spiders that fall within both subsets.

What we have defined here are two mutually exclusive events. With only one experiment, the outcome cannot satisfy both events. Formally, we say that the probability of both AA and BB is zero:

P(\text{A} \cap \text{B}) = 0

But also, since there are are no spiders that fall outside of AA or BB, the probability of either one event OR the other occurring with one experiment is actually 1:

P(\text{A} \cup \text{B}) = 0

Naive Vs. Standard Probability

The reason to differentiate between these two definitions is one of caution. We defined above the naive probability, which has two incredibly important assumptions:

1. The sample space is finite
2. Each outcome is equally likely

This clearly serves us well for our current example, and in fact from here on we will refer to the naive probability simply as probability, but it’s useful to recognize that as soon as we care to make more interesting conditions surrounding our sample space, we must adjust our definition of probability (we won’t cover that here).

Probability Distributions

Our above example was primarily focused on an example where two possible events covered the entire sample space. A commonly used example in the same vein would be flipping a coin – there are only two possibly outcomes: heads or tails. However, this is usually not the case. While it’s possible we may only be interested in a handful of the events possible, it’s rare that those encompass the entire sample space.

To think about the probability of a variety of events occurring, we can differentiate between discrete probabilities and continuous probabilities.

Discrete Probability Distributions

As the name implies, discrete probability distributions are distributions that describe the probabilities of each possible event in the sample space.

If we zoom in on a single base, we can only “see” one of A, C, G, or T. So, our sample space SS is made up of the four mutually exclusive events, which is seeing either A, C, G, or T. If we assume that bases are distributed with even frequency, we can imagine that the probability of each would be the same:

P(\text{A}) = 0.25
\\
P(\text{B}) = 0.25
\\
P(\text{C}) = 0.25
\\
P(\text{D}) = 0.25

which would result in a probability distribution that may look like this:

library(ggplot2)
library(ggthemes)

df <- data.frame(
  base = c("A", "C", "G", "T"),
  prob = 0.25
)

ggplot(data = df) +
  geom_col(aes(x = base, y = prob, fill = base)) +
  ggthemes::theme_base() +
  labs(x = "Nucleotide Base", y = "Probability") +
  ylim(c(0,1))

This is intuitive. Any way that the distribution is partitioned, the sum of probabilities of each event must sum to 1.0 without exception. The most common discrete probability distributions are the Poisson and Bernoulli distributions.

Discrete distributions typically are described by their probability mass functions, which give the probabilities of a discrete random variable being exactly equal to some values. These probabilites must always sum to 1.0 and have a general form of

p_{X}(x) = P(X = x)

It’s helpful to know how to plot probability distributions, as it’s visually easiest to see when different parameters result in different probability distributions when we can compare parameter values.

The probability mass function for the Poisson distribution is actually fairly simple, as there’s only one parameter (λλ), this parameter simply indicates the “shape” of the function, or how many average events happen in a given time interval. Conveniently in R, there are mass functions for most common distributions. Let’s take a look at ?rpois and we see that we can plot the probability densities with the dpois function. Let’s choose three different parameter values and see how that changes our probability density. In addition, it’s actually much easier to make plots of discrete distributions in base R so we’ll do that:

# first make a sequence of values to construct our density across:
x <- seq(0, 100, 1)
plot(x, dpois(x, lambda = 1),
    type = "h",
    lwd = 3,
    main = "lambda = 1",
    ylab = "Probability Mass",
    xlab = "X")

Now note here that we’ve plotted this as these vertical lines, instead of some continuous curve. Why? Well, recall this is a discrete probability distribution. There are no probabilities in the continuous space between integer values. So to plot this as a curve would actually be incorrect. That’s why it’s better to be explicit in this fashion and plot them as such here. Other λλ values:

plot(x, dpois(x, lambda = 5),
    type = "h",
    lwd = 3,
    main = "lambda = 5",
    ylab = "Probability Mass",
    xlab = "X")

plot(x, dpois(x, lambda = 25),
    type = "h",
    lwd = 3,
    main = "lambda = 25",
    ylab = "Probability Mass",
    xlab = "X")

We can see how the mass function changes given our changing values for the λλ.

Continuous Probability Distributions

Again as the name implies, between two variables which are both continuous, an infinite number of other values are possible. To think about these distributions, we often think of probability densities. It’s useful to be able to plot probability densities for a handful of common continuous distributions. We’ll plot probability densities for the Gaussian/Normal, Exponential, and Gamma distributions. As a good reminder, to recall what forms the probability density functions for some given distribution look like, the NIST/SEMATCH e-handbook of Statistical Methods has a great set of descriptions on probability distributions. Let’s refresh our minds about the Normal Distribution. The Normal or Gaussian distribution is the classic “bell-shaped curve” we’re used to seeing when we think of any distribution at all.

Conveniently in R, there are density functions for most common distributions. In fact, if we take a look at ?rnorm, we see a helpful set of functions to do with the normal distribution. We have functions for the density dnorm, the distribution function pnorm, the quantile function qnorm and a random deviate sample rnorm. This exists for other distributions too (HINT: try ?rgamma)

Let’s plot the density of a few normal distributions showing how a difference in parameters gives different probability density curves. The probability density function for the normal distribution is

f(x) = \frac{e^{-(x-\mu)^2/(2\sigma^2)}}{\sigma \sqrt{2\pi}}

This looks a bit complicated, but in reality, there are only two parameters! The ones we’re used to for the normal distribtuion, μμ the mean, and σσ the standard deviation. The rest of the values you see here are actually just constants. Similarly to how we did with the Poisson distribution above, let’s see how changing these variables will change our probability density curves.

Let’s first see how changing the σσ will affect the curves. Again, base plotting actually has an advantage here:

x <- seq(-5, 5, 0.1)
fx <- dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 1) # mu = 0 and sd = 1 is the "standard" normal

plot(x = x, y = fx,
    type = "l",
    xlab = "X",
    ylab = "density")

Now let’s add some other standard deviations:

# make the plot then add on the other lines
x <- seq(-5, 5, 0.1)
fx <- dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 1) # mu = 0 and sd = 1 is the "standard" normal

plot(
  x,
  fx,
  type = "l",
  xlab = "X",
  ylab = "density",
  ylim = c(0, 0.9)
)

# add new lines on for each of our new sd's
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 0.75), col="red")
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 0.5), col="blue")
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 1.2), col="green")

# now let's add a legend
legend("topleft", title = "Standard Deviations",
      c("sd = 1", "sd = 0.75", "sd = 0.5", "sd = 1.2"),
      lwd = 2, lty = 1,
      col = c("black", "red", "blue", "green"))

We can also hold the standard deviation constant and plot different mean values. Let’s try that now:

# make the plot then add on the other lines
x <- seq(-5, 5, 0.1)
fx <- dnorm(x, mean = 0, sd = 1) # mu = 0 and sd = 1 is the "standard" normal

plot(
  x,
  fx,
  type = "l",
  xlab = "X",
  ylab = "density",
)

# add new lines on for each of our new sd's
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = 2, sd = 1), col="red")
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = 1, sd = 1), col="blue")
lines(x, dnorm(x, mean = -1, sd = 1), col="green")

# now let's add a legend
legend("topleft", title = "Mean Values",
      c("mu = 0", "mu = 2", "mu = 1", "mu = -1"),
      lwd = 2, lty = 1,
      col = c("black", "red", "blue", "green"))

This likely looks much as we may have anticipated. We are simply shifting the plot left or right depending on the mean.