Let the possible numerical outcomes be , and give the reference law uniform distribution on a finite set: . We want a law with expected value . Write the three probabilities in outcome order as . The mean constraint is , while normalization requires .
These conditions leave a whole line of possible probability distributions:
For example, and both have the required mean. The constraint alone does not choose between them. Information projection selects the point on this line with the smallest relative entropy from the reference.
Exponential tilting gives weights proportional to . Set and multiply these weights by to obtain . Enforcing the mean gives
The positive root is , hence
The most favored outcome becomes , but all three remain possible. This is an exact constructed example with a stipulated reference law and constraint, not a fitted distribution from measurements.
Figure 1.
A mean constraint selects the least-divergent law in a probability simplex
. Each point represents a probability distribution on . The color is relative entropy from the uniform reference, in nats. The green segment fixes expected value , and its marked point is the exact information projection on three outcomes. The diagram is calculated from the stated model. Details.
The word "projection" does not mean ordinary perpendicular projection in the plotted Euclidean space. For the same reference and mean constraint, minimizing the squared Euclidean distance in the three probability coordinates instead gives
Thus the Euclidean minimizer is , whereas the information projection has . The squared Euclidean objective at its own minimum is ; its relative entropy is approximately nats, larger than the optimum nats. Both distributions satisfy the same constraint.
Figure 1.
Relative entropy and least squares select different laws under the same mean constraint
. Both plots use the feasible laws and the same uniform reference. The left plot minimizes relative entropy; the right plot minimizes squared Euclidean distance in the three probability coordinates. Their different marked minima explain why the choice of objective matters. Details.
The reference and objective encode what "least change" means. Relative entropy is asymmetric and is not a metric; its minimization answers a different question from linear least squares. The useful geometric analogy comes from a Pythagorean inequality for information projection, rather than from an assertion that the colored contours are circles.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.