This article is available as a gzipped PostScript file,
as a PDF file or
as a gzipped-tar file, which contains the
TeX-source and 5 figures.
The principle of maximum entropy is a method for assigning values to
probability distributions on the basis of partial information. In
usual formulations of this and related methods of inference one
assumes that this partial information takes the form of a constraint
on allowed probability distributions. In practical applications,
however, the information consists of empirical data. A constraint rule
is then employed to these data. Usually one adopts the rule to equate
the expectation values of certain functions with their empirical
averages. There are, however, various other ways in which one can
construct constraints from empirical data, which makes the maximum
entropy principle lead to very different probability assignments.
This paper shows that an argument by Jaynes to justify the usual
constraint rule is unsatisfactory and investigates several alternative
choices. The choice of a constraint rule is also shown to be of
crucial importance to the debate on the question whether there is a
conflict between the methods of inference based on maximum entropy and
Bayesian conditionalization.