Nonparametric hierarchical Bayes analysis of binomial data via Bernstein polynomial priors

For binomial data analysis, many methods based on empirical Bayes interpretations have been developed, in which a variance‐stabilizing transformation and a normality assumption are usually required. To achieve the greatest model flexibility, we conduct nonparametric Bayesian inference for binomial data and employ a special nonparametric Bayesian prior—the Bernstein–Dirichlet process (BDP)—in the hierarchical Bayes model for the data. The BDP is a special Dirichlet process (DP) mixture based on beta distributions, and the posterior distribution resulting from it has a smooth density defined on [0, 1]. We examine two Markov chain Monte Carlo procedures for simulating from the resulting posterior distribution, and compare their convergence rates and computational efficiency. In contrast to existing results for posterior consistency based on direct observations, the posterior consistency of the BDP, given indirect binomial data, is established. We study shrinkage effects and the robustness of the BDP‐based posterior estimators in comparison with several other empirical and hierarchical Bayes estimators, and we illustrate through examples that the BDP‐based nonparametric Bayesian estimate is more robust to the sample variation and tends to have a smaller estimation error than those based on the DP prior. In certain settings, the new estimator can also beat Stein's estimator, Efron and Morris's limited‐translation estimator, and many other existing empirical Bayes estimators. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 40: 328–344; 2012 © 2012 Statistical Society of Canada     

Empirical Uncertain Bayes Methods in Area‐level Models

Random effects model can account for the lack of fitting a regression model and increase precision of estimating area‐level means. However, in case that the synthetic mean provides accurate estimates, the prior distribution may inflate an estimation error. Thus, it is desirable to consider the uncertain prior distribution, which is expressed as the mixture of a one‐point distribution and a proper prior distribution. In this paper, we develop an empirical Bayes approach for estimating area‐level means, using the uncertain prior distribution in the context of a natural exponential family, which we call the empirical uncertain Bayes (EUB) method. The regression model considered in this paper includes the Poisson‐gamma and the binomial‐beta, and the normal‐normal (Fay–Herriot) model, which are typically used in small area estimation. We obtain the estimators of hyperparameters based on the marginal likelihood by using a well‐known expectation‐maximization algorithm and propose the EUB estimators of area means. For risk evaluation of the EUB estimator, we derive a second‐order unbiased estimator of a conditional mean squared error by using some techniques of numerical calculation. Through simulation studies and real data applications, we evaluate a performance of the EUB estimator and compare it with the usual empirical Bayes estimator.     

Regularized Posteriors in Linear Ill‐Posed Inverse Problems

Abstract. We study the Bayesian solution of a linear inverse problem in a separable Hilbert space setting with Gaussian prior and noise distribution. Our contribution is to propose a new Bayes estimator which is a linear and continuous estimator on the whole space and is stronger than the mean of the exact Gaussian posterior distribution which is only defined as a measurable linear transformation. Our estimator is the mean of a slightly modified posterior distribution called regularized posterior distribution. Frequentist consistency of our estimator and of the regularized posterior distribution is proved. A Monte Carlo study and an application to real data confirm good small‐sample properties of our procedure.     

Bayes methods in the ecological fallacy cntext:estimation of individual correlation from aggregate data

The ecological fallacy is related to Simpson's paradox (1951) where relationships among group means may be counterintuitive and substantially different from relationships within groups, where the groups are usually geographic entities such as census tracts. We consider the problem of estimating the correlation between two jointly normal random variables where only ecological data (group means) are available. Two empirical Bayes estimators and one fully Bayesian estimator are derived and compared with the usual ecological estimator, which is simply the Pearson correlation coefficient of the group sample means. We simulate the bias and mean squared error performance of these estimators, and also give an example employing a dataset where the individual level data are available for model checking. The results indicate superiority of the empirical Bayes estimators in a variety of practical situations where, though we lack individual level data, other relevant prior information is available.     

Approximating bayesian inference by weighted likelihood

The author proposes to use weighted likelihood to approximate Bayesian inference when no external or prior information is available. He proposes a weighted likelihood estimator that minimizes the empirical Bayes risk under relative entropy loss. He discusses connections among the weighted likelihood, empirical Bayes and James‐Stein estimators. Both simulated and real data sets are used for illustration purposes.     

BAYESIAN SUBSET SELECTION AND MODEL AVERAGING USING A CENTRED AND DISPERSED PRIOR FOR THE ERROR VARIANCE

This article proposes a new data‐based prior distribution for the error variance in a Gaussian linear regression model, when the model is used for Bayesian variable selection and model averaging. For a given subset of variables in the model, this prior has a mode that is an unbiased estimator of the error variance but is suitably dispersed to make it uninformative relative to the marginal likelihood. The advantage of this empirical Bayes prior for the error variance is that it is centred and dispersed sensibly and avoids the arbitrary specification of hyperparameters. The performance of the new prior is compared to that of a prior proposed previously in the literature using several simulated examples and two loss functions. For each example our paper also reports results for the model that orthogonalizes the predictor variables before performing subset selection. A real example is also investigated. The empirical results suggest that for both the simulated and real data, the performance of the estimators based on the prior proposed in our article compares favourably with that of a prior used previously in the literature.     

Empirical Bayes estimation for the mean of the selected normal population when there are additional data

ABSTRACT

This paper is concerned with the problem of estimation for the mean of the selected population from two normal populations with unknown means and common known variance in a Bayesian framework. The empirical Bayes estimator, when there are available additional observations, is derived and its bias and risk function are computed. The expected bias and risk of the empirical Bayes estimator and the intuitive estimator are compared. It is shown that the empirical Bayes estimator is asymptotically optimal and especially dominates the intuitive estimator in terms of Bayes risk, with respect to any normal prior. Also, the Bayesian correlation between the mean of the selected population (random parameter) and some interested estimators are obtained and compared.     

Using Bayesian analysis in repeated preclinical in vivo studies for a more effective use of animals

Whilst innovative Bayesian approaches are increasingly used in clinical studies, in the preclinical area Bayesian methods appear to be rarely used in the reporting of pharmacology data. This is particularly surprising in the context of regularly repeated in vivo studies where there is a considerable amount of data from historical control groups, which has potential value. This paper describes our experience with introducing Bayesian analysis for such studies using a Bayesian meta‐analytic predictive approach. This leads naturally either to an informative prior for a control group as part of a full Bayesian analysis of the next study or using a predictive distribution to replace a control group entirely. We use quality control charts to illustrate study‐to‐study variation to the scientists and describe informative priors in terms of their approximate effective numbers of animals. We describe two case studies of animal models: the lipopolysaccharide‐induced cytokine release model used in inflammation and the novel object recognition model used to screen cognitive enhancers, both of which show the advantage of a Bayesian approach over the standard frequentist analysis. We conclude that using Bayesian methods in stable repeated in vivo studies can result in a more effective use of animals, either by reducing the total number of animals used or by increasing the precision of key treatment differences. This will lead to clearer results and supports the “3Rs initiative” to Refine, Reduce and Replace animals in research. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Adaptive power priors with empirical Bayes for clinical trials

Incorporating historical information into the design and analysis of a new clinical trial has been the subject of much discussion as a way to increase the feasibility of trials in situations where patients are difficult to recruit. The best method to include this data is not yet clear, especially in the case when few historical studies are available. This paper looks at the power prior technique afresh in a binomial setting and examines some previously unexamined properties, such as Box P values, bias, and coverage. Additionally, it proposes an empirical Bayes‐type approach to estimating the prior weight parameter by marginal likelihood. This estimate has advantages over previously criticised methods in that it varies commensurably with differences in the historical and current data and can choose weights near 1 when the data are similar enough. Fully Bayesian approaches are also considered. An analysis of the operating characteristics shows that the adaptive methods work well and that the various approaches have different strengths and weaknesses.     

Empirical Bayes approach to wavelet regression using ϵ-contaminated priors

We consider an empirical Bayes approach to standard nonparametric regression estimation using a nonlinear wavelet methodology. Instead of specifying a single prior distribution on the parameter space of wavelet coefficients, which is usually the case in the existing literature, we elicit the ?-contamination class of prior distributions that is particularly attractive to work with when one seeks robust priors in Bayesian analysis. The type II maximum likelihood approach to prior selection is used by maximizing the predictive distribution for the data in the wavelet domain over a suitable subclass of the ?-contamination class of prior distributions. For the prior selected, the posterior mean yields a thresholding procedure which depends on one free prior parameter and it is level- and amplitude-dependent, thus allowing better adaptation in function estimation. We consider an automatic choice of the free prior parameter, guided by considerations on an exact risk analysis and on the shape of the thresholding rule, enabling the resulting estimator to be fully automated in practice. We also compute pointwise Bayesian credible intervals for the resulting function estimate using a simulation-based approach. We use several simulated examples to illustrate the performance of the proposed empirical Bayes term-by-term wavelet scheme, and we make comparisons with other classical and empirical Bayes term-by-term wavelet schemes. As a practical illustration, we present an application to a real-life data set that was collected in an atomic force microscopy study.     

Testing equality of regression coefficients in heteroscedastic normal regression models

This article addresses the problem of testing whether the vectors of regression coefficients are equal for two independent normal regression models when the error variances are unknown. This problem poses severe difficulties both to the frequentist and Bayesian approaches to statistical inference. In the former approach, normal hypothesis testing theory does not apply because of the unrelated variances. In the latter, the prior distributions typically used for the parameters are improper and hence the Bayes factor-based solution cannot be used.We propose a Bayesian solution to this problem in which no subjective input is considered. We first generate “objective” proper prior distributions (intrinsic priors) for which the Bayes factor and model posterior probabilities are well defined. The posterior probability of each model is used as a model selection tool. This consistent procedure of testing hypotheses is compared with some of the frequentist approximate tests proposed in the literature.     

SMALL‐AREA ESTIMATION OF POVERTY: THE AID INDUSTRY STANDARD AND ITS ALTERNATIVES

Small‐area estimation of poverty‐related variables is an increasingly important analytical tool in targeting the delivery of food and other aid in developing countries. We compare two methods for the estimation of small‐area means and proportions, namely empirical Bayes and composite estimation, with what has become the international standard method of Elbers, Lanjouw & Lanjouw (2003) . In addition to differences among the sets of estimates and associated estimated standard errors, we discuss data requirements, design and model selection issues and computational complexity. The Elbers, Lanjouw and Lanjouw (ELL) method is found to produce broadly similar estimates but to have much smaller estimated standard errors than the other methods. The question of whether these standard error estimates are downwardly biased is discussed. Although the question cannot yet be answered in full, as a precautionary measure it is strongly recommended that the ELL model be modified to include a small‐area‐level error component in addition to the cluster‐level and household‐level errors it currently contains. This recommendation is particularly important because the allocation of billions of dollars of aid funding is being determined and monitored via ELL. Under current aid distribution mechanisms, any downward bias in estimates of standard error may lead to allocations that are suboptimal because distinctions are made between estimated poverty levels at the small‐area level that are not significantly different statistically.     

Non‐parametric Bayesian Intensity Model: Exploring Time‐to‐Event Data on Two Time Scales

Time‐to‐event data have been extensively studied in many areas. Although multiple time scales are often observed, commonly used methods are based on a single time scale. Analysing time‐to‐event data on two time scales can offer a more extensive insight into the phenomenon. We introduce a non‐parametric Bayesian intensity model to analyse two‐dimensional point process on Lexis diagrams. After a simple discretization of the two‐dimensional process, we model the intensity by a one‐dimensional piecewise constant hazard functions parametrized by the change points and corresponding hazard levels. Our prior distribution incorporates a built‐in smoothing feature in two dimensions. We implement posterior simulation using the reversible jump Metropolis–Hastings algorithm and demonstrate the applicability of the method using both simulated and empirical survival data. Our approach outperforms commonly applied models by borrowing strength in two dimensions.     

A Generalized Bayes Rule for Prediction

In the case of prior knowledge about the unknown parameter, the Bayesian predictive density coincides with the Bayes estimator for the true density in the sense of the Kullback-Leibler divergence, but this is no longer true if we consider another loss function. In this paper we present a generalized Bayes rule to obtain Bayes density estimators with respect to any α-divergence, including the Kullback-Leibler divergence and the Hellinger distance. For curved exponential models, we study the asymptotic behaviour of these predictive densities. We show that, whatever prior we use, the generalized Bayes rule improves (in a non-Bayesian sense) the estimative density corresponding to a bias modification of the maximum likelihood estimator. It gives rise to a correspondence between choosing a prior density for the generalized Bayes rule and fixing a bias for the maximum likelihood estimator in the classical setting. A criterion for comparing and selecting prior densities is also given.     

On predictive distributions and Bayesian networks

In this paper we are interested in discrete prediction problems for a decision-theoretic setting, where the task is to compute the predictive distribution for a finite set of possible alternatives. This question is first addressed in a general Bayesian framework, where we consider a set of probability distributions defined by some parametric model class. Given a prior distribution on the model parameters and a set of sample data, one possible approach for determining a predictive distribution is to fix the parameters to the instantiation with the maximum a posteriori probability. A more accurate predictive distribution can be obtained by computing the evidence (marginal likelihood), i.e., the integral over all the individual parameter instantiations. As an alternative to these two approaches, we demonstrate how to use Rissanen's new definition of stochastic complexity for determining predictive distributions, and show how the evidence predictive distribution with Jeffrey's prior approaches the new stochastic complexity predictive distribution in the limit with increasing amount of sample data. To compare the alternative approaches in practice, each of the predictive distributions discussed is instantiated in the Bayesian network model family case. In particular, to determine Jeffrey's prior for this model family, we show how to compute the (expected) Fisher information matrix for a fixed but arbitrary Bayesian network structure. In the empirical part of the paper the predictive distributions are compared by using the simple tree-structured Naive Bayes model, which is used in the experiments for computational reasons. The experimentation with several public domain classification datasets suggest that the evidence approach produces the most accurate predictions in the log-score sense. The evidence-based methods are also quite robust in the sense that they predict surprisingly well even when only a small fraction of the full training set is used.     

Addressing potential prior‐data conflict when using informative priors in proof‐of‐concept studies

Bayesian methods are increasingly used in proof‐of‐concept studies. An important benefit of these methods is the potential to use informative priors, thereby reducing sample size. This is particularly relevant for treatment arms where there is a substantial amount of historical information such as placebo and active comparators. One issue with using an informative prior is the possibility of a mismatch between the informative prior and the observed data, referred to as prior‐data conflict. We focus on two methods for dealing with this: a testing approach and a mixture prior approach. The testing approach assesses prior‐data conflict by comparing the observed data to the prior predictive distribution and resorting to a non‐informative prior if prior‐data conflict is declared. The mixture prior approach uses a prior with a precise and diffuse component. We assess these approaches for the normal case via simulation and show they have some attractive features as compared with the standard one‐component informative prior. For example, when the discrepancy between the prior and the data is sufficiently marked, and intuitively, one feels less certain about the results, both the testing and mixture approaches typically yield wider posterior‐credible intervals than when there is no discrepancy. In contrast, when there is no discrepancy, the results of these approaches are typically similar to the standard approach. Whilst for any specific study, the operating characteristics of any selected approach should be assessed and agreed at the design stage; we believe these two approaches are each worthy of consideration. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Nonparametric Bayes estimation of gap-time distribution with recurrent event data

Nonparametric Bayes (NPB) estimation of the gap-time survivor function governing the time to occurrence of a recurrent event in the presence of censoring is considered. In our Bayesian approach, the gap-time distribution, denoted by F, has a Dirichlet process prior with parameter α. We derive NPB and nonparametric empirical Bayes (NPEB) estimators of the survivor function F?=1?F and construct point-wise credible intervals. The resulting Bayes estimator of F? extends that based on single-event right-censored data, and the PL-type estimator is a limiting case of this Bayes estimator. Through simulation studies, we demonstrate that the PL-type estimator has smaller biases but higher root-mean-squared errors (RMSEs) than those of the NPB and the NPEB estimators. Even in the case of a mis-specified prior measure parameter α, the NPB and the NPEB estimators have smaller RMSEs than the PL-type estimator, indicating robustness of the NPB and NPEB estimators. In addition, the NPB and NPEB estimators are smoother (in some sense) than the PL-type estimator.     

Bayesian predictive modeling for Inverse Gamma-Pareto composite distribution

Inverse Gamma-Pareto composite distribution is considered as a model for heavy tailed data. The maximum likelihood (ML), smoothed empirical percentile (SM), and Bayes estimators (informative and non-informative) for the parameter θ, which is the boundary point for the supports of the two distributions are derived. A Bayesian predictive density is derived via a gamma prior for θ and the density is used to estimate risk measures. Accuracy of estimators of θ and the risk measures are assessed via simulation studies. It is shown that the informative Bayes estimator is consistently more accurate than ML, Smoothed, and the non-informative Bayes estimators.     

Bayes and empirical bayes estimation of the probability that z > x + y

Let X, Y and Z be independent random variables with common unknown distribution F. Using the Dirichlet process prior for F and squared erro loss function, the Bayes and empirical Bayes estimators of the parameters λ(F). the probability that Z > X + Y, are derived. The limiting Bayes estimator of λ(F) under some conditions on the parameter of the process is shown to be asymptotically normal. The aysmptotic optimality of the empirical Bayes estimator of λ(F) is established. When X, Y and Z have support on the positive real line, these results are derived for randomly right censored data. This problem relates to testing whether than used discussed by Hollander and Proshcan (1972) and Chen, Hollander and Langberg (1983).     

Generalized Additive Models for Zero‐Inflated Data with Partial Constraints

Abstract. Zero‐inflated data abound in ecological studies as well as in other scientific fields. Non‐parametric regression with zero‐inflated response may be studied via the zero‐inflated generalized additive model (ZIGAM) with a probabilistic mixture distribution of zero and a regular exponential family component. We propose the (partially) constrained ZIGAM, which assumes that some covariates affect the probability of non‐zero‐inflation and the regular exponential family distribution mean proportionally on the link scales. When the assumption obtains, the new approach provides a unified framework for modelling zero‐inflated data, which is more parsimonious and efficient than the unconstrained ZIGAM. We develop an iterative estimation algorithm, and discuss the confidence interval construction of the estimator. Some asymptotic properties are derived. We also propose a Bayesian model selection criterion for choosing between the unconstrained and constrained ZIGAMs. The new methods are illustrated with both simulated data and a real application in jellyfish abundance data analysis.