In a 1935 paper, and in his book Theory of Probability, Jeffreys developed a methodology for quantifying the evidence in favor of a scientific theory. The centerpiece was a number, now called the Bayes factor, which is the posterior odds of the null hypothesis when the prior probability on the null is one-half. Although there has been much discussion of Bayesian hypothesis testing in the context of criticism of P -values, less attention has been given to the Bayes factor as a practical tool of applied statistics. In this paper we review and discuss the uses of Bayes factors in the context of five scientific applications in genetics, sports, ecology, sociology and psychology.

With ideal spatial adaptation, an oracle furnishes information about how best to adapt a spatially variable estimator, whether piecewise constant, piecewise polynomial, variable knot spline, or variable bandwidth kernel, to the unknown function. Estimation with the aid of an oracle o ers dramatic advantages over traditional linear estimation by nonadaptive kernels � however, it is a priori unclear whether such performance can be obtained by a procedure relying on the data alone. We describe a new principle for spatially-adaptive estimation: selective wavelet reconstruction. Weshowthatvariableknot spline ts and piecewise-polynomial ts, when equipped with an oracle to select the knots, are not dramatically more powerful than selective wavelet reconstruction with an oracle. We develop a practical spatially adaptive method, RiskShrink, which works by shrinkage of empirical wavelet coe cients. RiskShrink mimics the performance of an oracle for selective wavelet reconstruction as well as it is possible to do so. A new inequality inmultivariate normal decision theory which wecallthe oracle inequality shows that attained performance di ers from ideal performance by at most a factor 2logn, where n is the sample size. Moreover no estimator can give a better guarantee than this. Within the class of spatially adaptive procedures, RiskShrink is essentially optimal. Relying only on the data, it comes within a factor log 2 n of the performance of piecewise polynomial and variable-knot spline methods equipped with an oracle. In contrast, it is unknown how or if piecewise polynomial methods could be made to function this well when denied access to an oracle and forced to rely on data alone.

We consider the problem of model selection and accounting for model uncertainty in high-dimensional contingency tables, motivated by expert system applications. The approach most used currently is a stepwise strategy guided by tests based on approximate asymptotic P-values leading to the selection of a single model; inference is then conditional on the selected model. The sampling properties of such a strategy are complex, and the failure to take account of model uncertainty leads to underestimation of uncertainty about quantities of interest. In principle, a panacea is provided by the standard Bayesian formalism which averages the posterior distributions of the quantity of interest under each of the models, weighted by their posterior model probabilities. Furthermore, this approach is optimal in the sense of maximising predictive ability. However, this has not been used in practice because computing the posterior model probabilities is hard and the number of models is very large (often greater than 1011). We argue that the standard Bayesian formalism is unsatisfactory and we propose an alternative Bayesian approach that, we contend, takes full account of the true model uncertainty byaveraging overamuch smaller set of models. An efficient search algorithm is developed for nding these models. We consider two classes of graphical models that arise in expert systems: the recursive causal models and the decomposable

Abstract not found

We consider the problem of accounting for model uncertainty in linear regression models. Conditioning on a single selected model ignores model uncertainty, and thus leads to the underestimation of uncertainty when making inferences about quantities of interest. A Bayesian solution to this problem involves averaging over all possible models (i.e., combinations of predictors) when making inferences about quantities of

In a 1935 paper, and in his book Theory of Probability, Jeffreys developed a methodology for quantifying the evidence in favor of a scientific theory. The centerpiece was a number, now called the Bayes factor, which is the posterior odds of the null hypothesis when the prior probability on the null is one-half. Although there has been much discussion of Bayesian hypothesis testing in the context of criticism of P-values, less attention has been given to the Bayes factor as a practical tool of applied statistics. In this paper we review and discuss the uses of Bayes factors in the context of five scientific applications. The points we emphasize are:- from Jeffreys's Bayesian point of view, the purpose of hypothesis testing is to evaluate the evidence in favor of a scientific theory;- Bayes factors offer a way of evaluating evidence in favor ofa null hypothesis;- Bayes factors provide a way of incorporating external information into the evaluation of evidence about a hypothesis;- Bayes factors are very general, and do not require alternative models to be nested;- several techniques are available for computing Bayes factors, including asymptotic approximations which are easy to compute using the output from standard packages that maximize likelihoods;- in "non-standard " statistical models that do not satisfy common regularity conditions, it can be technically simpler to calculate Bayes factors than to derive non-Bayesian significance

We consider the problems of variable selection and accounting for model uncertainty in linear regression models. Conditioning on a single selected model ignores model uncertainty, and thus leads to the underestimation of uncertainty when making inferences about quantities of interest. The complete Bayesian solution to this problem involves averaging over all possible models when making inferences about quantities of interest. This approach is often not practical. In this paper we offer two alternative approaches. First we describe a Bayesian model selection algorithm called "Occam's "Window" which involves averaging over a reduced set of models. Second, we describe a Markov chain Monte Carlo approach which directly approximates the exact solution. Both these model averaging procedures provide better predictive performance than any single model which might reasonably have been selected. In the extreme case where there are many candidate predictors but there is no relationship between any of them and the response, standard variable selection procedures often choose some subset of variables that yields a high R² and a highly significant overall F value. We refer to this unfortunate phenomenon as "Freedman's Paradox" (Freedman, 1983). In this situation, Occam's vVindow usually indicates the null model as the only one to be considered, or else a small number of models including the null model, thus largely resolving the paradox.

Survival analysis is concerned with finding models to predict the survival of patients or to assess the efficacy of a clinical treatment. A key part of the model-building process is the selection of the predictor variables. It is standard to use a stepwise procedure guided by a series of significance tests to select a single model, and then to make inference conditionally on the selected model. However, this ignores model uncertainty, which can be substantial. We review the standard Bayesian model averaging solution to this problem and extend it to survival analysis, introducing partial Bayes factors to do so for the Cox proportional hazards model. In two examples, taking account of model uncertainty enhances predictive performance, to an extent that could be clinically useful. 1 Introduction From 1974 to 1984 the Mayo Clinic conducted a double-blinded randomized clinical trial involving 312 patients to compare the drug DPCA with a placebo in the treatment of primary biliary cirrhosis...

. Motion segmentation involves identifying regions of the image that correspond to independently moving objects. The number of independently moving objects, and type of motion model for each of the objects is unknown a priori. In order to perform motion segmentation, the problems of model selection, robust estimation and clustering must all be addressed simultaneously. Here we place the three problems into a common Bayesian framework; investigating the use of model averaging-representing a motion by a combination of models---as a principled way for motion segmentation of images. The final result is a fully automatic algorithm for clustering that works in the presence of noise and outliers. 1 Introduction Detection of independently moving objects is an essential but often neglected precursor to problems in computer vision e.g. e#cient video compression [3], video editing, surveillance, smart tracking of objects etc. The work in this paper stems from the desire to develop a g...

A Bayesian approach to model selection for structural equation models is outlined. This enables us to compare individual models, nested or non-nested, and also to search through the (perhaps vast) set of possible models for the best ones. The approach selects several models rather than just one, when appropriate, and so enables us to take account, both informally and formally, of uncertainty about model structure when making inferences about quantities of interest. The approach tends to select simpler models than strategies based on multiple P-value-based tests. It may thus help to overcome the criticism of structural