Results 1  10
of
125
Bayesian Data Analysis
, 1995
"... I actually own a copy of Harold Jeffreys’s Theory of Probability but have only read small bits of it, most recently over a decade ago to confirm that, indeed, Jeffreys was not too proud to use a classical chisquared pvalue when he wanted to check the misfit of a model to data (Gelman, Meng and Ste ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1508 (49 self)
 Add to MetaCart
I actually own a copy of Harold Jeffreys’s Theory of Probability but have only read small bits of it, most recently over a decade ago to confirm that, indeed, Jeffreys was not too proud to use a classical chisquared pvalue when he wanted to check the misfit of a model to data (Gelman, Meng and Stern, 2006). I do, however, feel that it is important to understand where our probability models come from, and I welcome the opportunity to use the present article by Robert, Chopin and Rousseau as a platform for further discussion of foundational issues. 2 In this brief discussion I will argue the following: (1) in thinking about prior distributions, we should go beyond Jeffreys’s principles and move toward weakly informative priors; (2) it is natural for those of us who work in social and computational sciences to favor complex models, contra Jeffreys’s preference for simplicity; and (3) a key generalization of Jeffreys’s ideas is to explicitly include model checking in the process of data analysis.
Using simulation methods for Bayesian econometric models: Inference, development and communication
 Econometric Review
, 1999
"... This paper surveys the fundamental principles of subjective Bayesian inference in econometrics and the implementation of those principles using posterior simulation methods. The emphasis is on the combination of models and the development of predictive distributions. Moving beyond conditioning on a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 257 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper surveys the fundamental principles of subjective Bayesian inference in econometrics and the implementation of those principles using posterior simulation methods. The emphasis is on the combination of models and the development of predictive distributions. Moving beyond conditioning on a fixed number of completely specified models, the paper introduces subjective Bayesian tools for formal comparison of these models with as yet incompletely specified models. The paper then shows how posterior simulators can facilitate communication between investigators (for example, econometricians) on the one hand and remote clients (for example, decision makers) on the other, enabling clients to vary the prior distributions and functions of interest employed by investigators. A theme of the paper is the practicality of subjective Bayesian methods. To this end, the paper describes publicly available software for Bayesian inference, model development, and communication and provides illustrations using two simple econometric models. *This paper was originally prepared for the Australasian meetings of the Econometric Society in Melbourne, Australia,
Posterior Predictive Assessment of Model Fitness Via Realized Discrepancies
 Statistica Sinica
, 1996
"... Abstract: This paper considers Bayesian counterparts of the classical tests for goodness of fit and their use in judging the fit of a single Bayesian model to the observed data. We focus on posterior predictive assessment, in a framework that also includes conditioning on auxiliary statistics. The B ..."
Abstract

Cited by 210 (32 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract: This paper considers Bayesian counterparts of the classical tests for goodness of fit and their use in judging the fit of a single Bayesian model to the observed data. We focus on posterior predictive assessment, in a framework that also includes conditioning on auxiliary statistics. The Bayesian formulation facilitates the construction and calculation of a meaningful reference distribution not only for any (classical) statistic, but also for any parameterdependent “statistic ” or discrepancy. The latter allows us to propose the realized discrepancy assessment of model fitness, which directly measures the true discrepancy between data and the posited model, for any aspect of the model which we want to explore. The computation required for the realized discrepancy assessment is a straightforward byproduct of the posterior simulation used for the original Bayesian analysis. We illustrate with three applied examples. The first example, which serves mainly to motivate the work, illustrates the difficulty of classical tests in assessing the fitness of a Poisson model to a positron emission tomography image that is constrained to be nonnegative. The second and third examples illustrate the details of the posterior predictive approach in two problems: estimation in a model with inequality constraints on the parameters, and estimation in a mixture model. In all three examples, standard test statistics (either a χ 2 or a likelihood ratio) are not pivotal: the difficulty is not just how to compute the reference distribution for the test, but that in the classical framework no such distribution exists, independent of the unknown model parameters. Key words and phrases: Bayesian pvalue, χ 2 test, discrepancy, graphical assessment, mixture model, model criticism, posterior predictive pvalue, prior predictive
Prior distributions for variance parameters in hierarchical models
 Bayesian Analysis
, 2006
"... Various noninformative prior distributions have been suggested for scale parameters in hierarchical models. We construct a new foldednoncentralt family of conditionally conjugate priors for hierarchical standard deviation parameters, and then consider noninformative and weakly informative priors i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 179 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Various noninformative prior distributions have been suggested for scale parameters in hierarchical models. We construct a new foldednoncentralt family of conditionally conjugate priors for hierarchical standard deviation parameters, and then consider noninformative and weakly informative priors in this family. We use an example to illustrate serious problems with the inversegamma family of “noninformative ” prior distributions. We suggest instead to use a uniform prior on the hierarchical standard deviation, using the halft family when the number of groups is small and in other settings where a weakly informative prior is desired.
Loss FunctionBased Evaluation of DSGE Models
 Journal of Applied Econometrics
, 2000
"... In this paper we propose a Bayesian econometric procedure for the evaluation and comparison of DSGE models. Unlike in many previous econometric approaches we explicitly take into account the possibility that the DSGE models are misspecified and introduce a reference model to complete the model space ..."
Abstract

Cited by 125 (26 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we propose a Bayesian econometric procedure for the evaluation and comparison of DSGE models. Unlike in many previous econometric approaches we explicitly take into account the possibility that the DSGE models are misspecified and introduce a reference model to complete the model space. Three loss functions are proposed to assess the discrepancy between DSGE model predictions and an overall posterior distribution of population characteristics that the researcher is trying to match. The evaluation procedure is applied to the comparison of a standard cashinadvance (CIA) and a portfolio adjustment cost (PAC) model. We find that the CIA model has higher posterior probability than the PAC model and achieves a better insample time series fit. Both models overpredict the magnitude of the negative correlation between output growth and inflation. However, unlike the PAC model, the CIA model is not able to generate a positive real effect of money growth shocks on aggregate output. Overall, the impulse response dynamics of the PAC model resemble the posterior mean impulse response functions more closely than the responses of the CIA model. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1.
Benchmark Priors for Bayesian Model Averaging
 FORTHCOMING IN THE JOURNAL OF ECONOMETRICS
, 2001
"... In contrast to a posterior analysis given a particular sampling model, posterior model probabilities in the context of model uncertainty are typically rather sensitive to the specification of the prior. In particular, “diffuse” priors on modelspecific parameters can lead to quite unexpected consequ ..."
Abstract

Cited by 114 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In contrast to a posterior analysis given a particular sampling model, posterior model probabilities in the context of model uncertainty are typically rather sensitive to the specification of the prior. In particular, “diffuse” priors on modelspecific parameters can lead to quite unexpected consequences. Here we focus on the practically relevant situation where we need to entertain a (large) number of sampling models and we have (or wish to use) little or no subjective prior information. We aim at providing an “automatic” or “benchmark” prior structure that can be used in such cases. We focus on the Normal linear regression model with uncertainty in the choice of regressors. We propose a partly noninformative prior structure related to a Natural Conjugate gprior specification, where the amount of subjective information requested from the user is limited to the choice of a single scalar hyperparameter g0j. The consequences of different choices for g0j are examined. We investigate theoretical properties, such as consistency of the implied Bayesian procedure. Links with classical information criteria are provided. More importantly, we examine the finite sample implications of several choices of g0j in a simulation study. The use of the MC3 algorithm of Madigan and York (1995), combined with efficient coding in Fortran, makes it feasible to conduct large simulations. In addition to posterior criteria, we shall also compare the predictive performance of different priors. A classic example concerning the economics of crime will also be provided and contrasted with results in the literature. The main findings of the paper will lead us to propose a “benchmark” prior specification in a linear regression context with model uncertainty.
An Introduction to Regression Graphics
, 1994
"... This article, which is based on an Interface tutorial, presents an overview of regression graphics, along with an annotated bibliography. The intent is to discuss basic ideas and issues without delving into methodological or theoretical details, and to provide a guide to the literature. 1 ..."
Abstract

Cited by 99 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This article, which is based on an Interface tutorial, presents an overview of regression graphics, along with an annotated bibliography. The intent is to discuss basic ideas and issues without delving into methodological or theoretical details, and to provide a guide to the literature. 1
Model Choice: A Minimum Posterior Predictive Loss Approach
, 1998
"... Model choice is a fundamental and much discussed activity in the analysis of data sets. Hierarchical models introducing random effects can not be handled by classical methods. Bayesian approaches using predictive distributions can, though the formal solution, which includes Bayes factors as a specia ..."
Abstract

Cited by 85 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Model choice is a fundamental and much discussed activity in the analysis of data sets. Hierarchical models introducing random effects can not be handled by classical methods. Bayesian approaches using predictive distributions can, though the formal solution, which includes Bayes factors as a special case, can be criticized. We propose a predictive criterion where the goal is good prediction of a replicate of the observed data but tempered by fidelity to the observed values. We obtain this criterion by minimizing posterior loss for a given model and then, for models under consideration, select the one which minimizes this criterion. For a broad range of losses, the criterion emerges approximately as a form partitioned into a goodnessoffit term and a penalty term. In the context of generalized linear mixed effects models we obtain a penalized deviance criterion comprised of a piece which is a Bayesian deviance measure and a piece which is a penalty for model complexity. We illustrate ...
Bayesian analysis of DSGE models
 ECONOMETRICS REVIEW
, 2007
"... This paper reviews Bayesian methods that have been developed in recent years to estimate and evaluate dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models. We consider the estimation of linearized DSGE models, the evaluation of models based on Bayesian model checking, posterior odds comparisons, and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 73 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper reviews Bayesian methods that have been developed in recent years to estimate and evaluate dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models. We consider the estimation of linearized DSGE models, the evaluation of models based on Bayesian model checking, posterior odds comparisons, and comparisons to vector autoregressions, as well as the nonlinear estimation based on a secondorder accurate model solution. These methods are applied to data generated from correctly specified and misspecified linearized DSGE models, and a DSGE model that was solved with a secondorder perturbation method. (JEL C11, C32, C51, C52)
Probabilistic topic models
 IEEE Signal Processing Magazine
, 2010
"... Probabilistic topic models are a suite of algorithms whose aim is to discover the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 71 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Probabilistic topic models are a suite of algorithms whose aim is to discover the