Results 11  20
of
187
Approximate Bayes Factors and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Generalized Linear Models
, 1993
"... Ways of obtaining approximate Bayes factors for generalized linear models are described, based on the Laplace method for integrals. I propose a new approximation which uses only the output of standard computer programs such as GUM; this appears to be quite accurate. A reference set of proper priors ..."
Abstract

Cited by 96 (28 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Ways of obtaining approximate Bayes factors for generalized linear models are described, based on the Laplace method for integrals. I propose a new approximation which uses only the output of standard computer programs such as GUM; this appears to be quite accurate. A reference set of proper priors is suggested, both to represent the situation where there is not much prior information, and to assess the sensitivity of the results to the prior distribution. The methods can be used when the dispersion parameter is unknown, when there is overdispersion, to compare link functions, and to compare error distributions and variance functions. The methods can be used to implement the Bayesian approach to accounting for model uncertainty. I describe an application to inference about relative risks in the presence of control factors where model uncertainty is large and important. Software to implement the
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 94 (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.
A characterization of Markov equivalence classes for acyclic digraphs
, 1995
"... Undirected graphs and acyclic digraphs (ADGs), as well as their mutual extension to chain graphs, are widely used to describe dependencies among variables in multivariate distributions. In particular, the likelihood functions of ADG models admit convenient recursive factorizations that often allow e ..."
Abstract

Cited by 92 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Undirected graphs and acyclic digraphs (ADGs), as well as their mutual extension to chain graphs, are widely used to describe dependencies among variables in multivariate distributions. In particular, the likelihood functions of ADG models admit convenient recursive factorizations that often allow explicit maximum likelihood estimates and that are well suited to building Bayesian networks for expert systems. Whereas the undirected graph associated with a dependence model is uniquely determined, there may, however, be many ADGs that determine the same dependence ( = Markov) model. Thus, the family of all ADGs with a given set of vertices is naturally partitioned into Markovequivalence classes, each class being associated with a unique statistical model. Statistical procedures, such as model selection or model averaging, that fail to take into account these equivalence classes, may incur substantial computational or other inefficiencies. Here it is shown that each Markovequivalence class is uniquely determined by a single chain graph, the essential graph, that is itself simultaneously Markov equivalent to all ADGs in the equivalence class. Essential graphs are characterized, a polynomialtime algorithm for their construction is given, and their applications to model selection and other statistical
Bayes factors and model uncertainty
 DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS, UNIVERSITY OFWASHINGTON
, 1993
"... 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 ..."
Abstract

Cited by 89 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
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 onehalf. Although there has been much discussion of Bayesian hypothesis testing in the context of criticism of Pvalues, 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 "nonstandard " statistical models that do not satisfy common regularity conditions, it can be technically simpler to calculate Bayes factors than to derive nonBayesian significance
The practical implementation of Bayesian model selection
 Institute of Mathematical Statistics
, 2001
"... In principle, the Bayesian approach to model selection is straightforward. Prior probability distributions are used to describe the uncertainty surrounding all unknowns. After observing the data, the posterior distribution provides a coherent post data summary of the remaining uncertainty which is r ..."
Abstract

Cited by 85 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In principle, the Bayesian approach to model selection is straightforward. Prior probability distributions are used to describe the uncertainty surrounding all unknowns. After observing the data, the posterior distribution provides a coherent post data summary of the remaining uncertainty which is relevant for model selection. However, the practical implementation of this approach often requires carefully tailored priors and novel posterior calculation methods. In this article, we illustrate some of the fundamental practical issues that arise for two different model selection problems: the variable selection problem for the linear model and the CART model selection problem.
A Bayesian Approach to Causal Discovery
, 1997
"... We examine the Bayesian approach to the discovery of directed acyclic causal models and compare it to the constraintbased approach. Both approaches rely on the Causal Markov assumption, but the two differ significantly in theory and practice. An important difference between the approaches is that t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 79 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We examine the Bayesian approach to the discovery of directed acyclic causal models and compare it to the constraintbased approach. Both approaches rely on the Causal Markov assumption, but the two differ significantly in theory and practice. An important difference between the approaches is that the constraintbased approach uses categorical information about conditionalindependence constraints in the domain, whereas the Bayesian approach weighs the degree to which such constraints hold. As a result, the Bayesian approach has three distinct advantages over its constraintbased counterpart. One, conclusions derived from the Bayesian approach are not susceptible to incorrect categorical decisions about independence facts that can occur with data sets of finite size. Two, using the Bayesian approach, finer distinctions among model structuresboth quantitative and qualitativecan be made. Three, information from several models can be combined to make better inferences and to better ...
Bayesian indoor positioning systems
 In Infocom
, 2005
"... Abstract — In this paper, we introduce a new approach to location estimation where, instead of locating a single client, we simultaneously locate a set of wireless clients. We present a Bayesian hierarchical model for indoor location estimation in wireless networks. We demonstrate that our model ach ..."
Abstract

Cited by 67 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract — In this paper, we introduce a new approach to location estimation where, instead of locating a single client, we simultaneously locate a set of wireless clients. We present a Bayesian hierarchical model for indoor location estimation in wireless networks. We demonstrate that our model achieves accuracy that is similar to other published models and algorithms. By harnessing prior knowledge, our model eliminates the requirement for training data as compared with existing approaches, thereby introducing the notion of a fully adaptive zero profiling approach to location estimation. Index Terms — Experimentation with real networks/Testbed, Statistics, WLAN, localization,
Decomposable Graphical Gaussian Model Determination
, 1999
"... We propose a methodology for Bayesian model determination in decomposable graphical gaussian models. To achieve this aim we consider a hyper inverse Wishart prior distribution on the concentration matrix for each given graph. To ensure compatibility across models, such prior distributions are obt ..."
Abstract

Cited by 64 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We propose a methodology for Bayesian model determination in decomposable graphical gaussian models. To achieve this aim we consider a hyper inverse Wishart prior distribution on the concentration matrix for each given graph. To ensure compatibility across models, such prior distributions are obtained by marginalisation from the prior conditional on the complete graph. We explore alternative structures for the hyperparameters of the latter, and their consequences for the model. Model determination is carried out by implementing a reversible jump MCMC sampler. In particular, the dimensionchanging move we propose involves adding or dropping an edge from the graph. We characterise the set of moves which preserve the decomposability of the graph, giving a fast algorithm for maintaining the junction tree representation of the graph at each sweep. As state variable, we propose to use the incomplete variancecovariance matrix, containing only the elements for which the correspondi...
Model Uncertainty in CrossCountry Growth Regressions
 Journal of Applied Econometrics
, 2001
"... We investigate the issue of model uncertainty in crosscountry growth regressions using Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA). We find that the posterior probability is spread widely among many models, suggesting the superiority of BMA over choosing any single model. Outofsample predictive results suppor ..."
Abstract

Cited by 60 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We investigate the issue of model uncertainty in crosscountry growth regressions using Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA). We find that the posterior probability is spread widely among many models, suggesting the superiority of BMA over choosing any single model. Outofsample predictive results support this claim. In contrast to Levine and Renelt (1992), our results broadly support the more ‘optimistic ’ conclusion of SalaiMartin (1997b), namely that some variables are important regressors for explaining crosscountry growth patterns. However, care should be taken in the methodology employed. The approach proposed here is firmly grounded in statistical theory and immediately leads to posterior and predictive inference. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1.
Semisupervised Learning of Classifiers: Theory, Algorithms and Their Application to HumanComputer Interaction
 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PATTERN ANALYSIS AND MACHINE INTELLIGENCE
, 2004
"... Automatic classification is one of the basic tasks required in any pattern recognition and human computer interaction application. In this paper we discuss training probabilistic classifiers with labeled and unlabeled data. We provide a new analysis that shows under what conditions unlabeled data ..."
Abstract

Cited by 59 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Automatic classification is one of the basic tasks required in any pattern recognition and human computer interaction application. In this paper we discuss training probabilistic classifiers with labeled and unlabeled data. We provide a new analysis that shows under what conditions unlabeled data can be used in learning to improve classification performance. We also show that if the conditions are violated, using unlabeled data can be detrimental to classification performance. We discuss the implications of this analysis to a specific type of probabilistic classifiers, Bayesian networks, and propose a new structure learning algorithm that can utilize unlabeled data to improve classification. Finally, we show how the resulting algorithms are successfully employed in two applications related to humancomputer interaction and pattern recognition; facial expression recognition and face detection.