Natural (Non‐)Informative Priors for Skew‐symmetric Distributions

In this paper, we present an innovative method for constructing proper priors for the skewness (shape) parameter in the skew‐symmetric family of distributions. The proposed method is based on assigning a prior distribution on the perturbation effect of the shape parameter, which is quantified in terms of the total variation distance. We discuss strategies to translate prior beliefs about the asymmetry of the data into an informative prior distribution of this class. We show via a Monte Carlo simulation study that our non‐informative priors induce posterior distributions with good frequentist properties, similar to those of the Jeffreys prior. Our informative priors yield better results than their competitors from the literature. We also propose a scale‐invariant and location‐invariant prior structure for models with unknown location and scale parameters and provide sufficient conditions for the propriety of the corresponding posterior distribution. Illustrative examples are presented using simulated and real data.     

The use of Jeffreys priors for the Student-t distribution

The Jeffreys-rule prior and the marginal independence Jeffreys prior are recently proposed in Fonseca et al. [Objective Bayesian analysis for the Student-t regression model, Biometrika 95 (2008), pp. 325–333] as objective priors for the Student-t regression model. The authors showed that the priors provide proper posterior distributions and perform favourably in parameter estimation. Motivated by a practical financial risk management application, we compare the performance of the two Jeffreys priors with other priors proposed in the literature in a problem of estimating high quantiles for the Student-t model with unknown degrees of freedom. Through an asymptotic analysis and a simulation study, we show that both Jeffreys priors perform better in using a specific quantile of the Bayesian predictive distribution to approximate the true quantile.     

Objective Bayesian Analysis of Skew‐t Distributions

Abstract. We study the Jeffreys prior and its properties for the shape parameter of univariate skew‐t distributions with linear and nonlinear Student's t skewing functions. In both cases, we show that the resulting priors for the shape parameter are symmetric around zero and proper. Moreover, we propose a Student's t approximation of the Jeffreys prior that makes an objective Bayesian analysis easy to perform. We carry out a Monte Carlo simulation study that demonstrates an overall better behaviour of the maximum a posteriori estimator compared with the maximum likelihood estimator. We also compare the frequentist coverage of the credible intervals based on the Jeffreys prior and its approximation and show that they are similar. We further discuss location‐scale models under scale mixtures of skew‐normal distributions and show some conditions for the existence of the posterior distribution and its moments. Finally, we present three numerical examples to illustrate the implications of our results on inference for skew‐t distributions.     

Noninformative priors for the between-group variance in the unbalanced one-way random effects model with heterogeneous error variances

For the unbalanced one-way random effects model with heterogeneous error variances, we propose the non-informative priors for the between-group variance and develop the first- and second-order matching priors. It turns out that the second-order matching priors do not exist and the reference prior and Jeffreys prior do not satisfy a first-order matching criterion. We also show that the first-order matching prior meets the frequentist target coverage probabilities much better than the Jeffreys prior and reference prior through simulation study, and the Bayesian credible intervals based on the matching prior and reference prior give shorter intervals than the existing confidence intervals by examples.     

A note on nonexistence of posterior moments

Bayesian analyses often take for granted the assumption that the posterior distribution has at least a first moment. They often include computed or estimated posterior means. In this note, the authors show an example of a Weibull distribution parameter where the theoretical posterior mean fails to exist for commonly used proper semi–conjugate priors. They also show that posterior moments can fail to exist with commonly used noninformative priors including Jeffreys, reference and matching priors, despite the fact that the posteriors are proper. Moreover, within a broad class of priors, the predictive distribution also has no mean. The authors illustrate the problem with a simulated example. Their results demonstrate that the unwitting use of estimated posterior means may yield unjustified conclusions.     

Jeffreys priors for survival models with censored data

When prior information on model parameters is weak or lacking, Bayesian statistical analyses are typically performed with so-called “default” priors. We consider the problem of constructing default priors for the parameters of survival models in the presence of censoring, using Jeffreys’ rule. We compare these Jeffreys priors to the “uncensored” Jeffreys priors, obtained without considering censored observations, for the parameters of the exponential and log-normal models. The comparison is based on the frequentist coverage of the posterior Bayes intervals obtained from these prior distributions.     

Objective Bayesian analysis of spatial data with measurement error

The author shows how geostatistical data that contain measurement errors can be analyzed objectively by a Bayesian approach using Gaussian random fields. He proposes a reference prior and two versions of Jeffreys' prior for the model parameters. He studies the propriety and the existence of moments for the resulting posteriors. He also establishes the existence of the mean and variance of the predictive distributions based on these default priors. His reference prior derives from a representation of the integrated likelihood that is particularly convenient for computation and analysis. He further shows that these default priors are not very sensitive to some aspects of the design and model, and that they have good frequentist properties. Finally, he uses a data set of carbon/nitrogen ratios from an agricultural field to illustrate his approach.     

Bayesian analysis of the generalized gamma distribution using non-informative priors

The Generalized gamma (GG) distribution plays an important role in statistical analysis. For this distribution, we derive non-informative priors using formal rules, such as Jeffreys prior, maximal data information prior and reference priors. We have shown that these most popular formal rules with natural ordering of parameters, lead to priors with improper posteriors. This problem is overcome by considering a prior averaging approach discussed in Berger et al. [Overall objective priors. Bayesian Analysis. 2015;10(1):189–221]. The obtained hybrid Jeffreys-reference prior is invariant under one-to-one transformations and yields a proper posterior distribution. We obtained good frequentist properties of the proposed prior using a detailed simulation study. Finally, an analysis of the maximum annual discharge of the river Rhine at Lobith is presented.     

Erratum to the paper: a note on reference prior for the scaler skew-normal distribution

Liseo and Loperfido [A note on reference priors for the scalar skew-normal distribution. J Statist Plann Inference. 2006;136(2):373–389] studied some peculiar features of default Bayes analysis of the scalar skew-normal model. In particular, they showed that, by considering the simplest model with a single unknown parameter λ of skewness, the reference – or Jeffreys’ – prior for this parameter is proper. They proved that tails of Jeffreys’ prior are of order O(λ^?3/2). But they made a mistake in their proof. In this note, we will modify their proof.     

Bayesian comparative study on binary time series

In this paper, we consider the Bayesian analysis of binary time series with different priors, namely normal, Students' t, and Jeffreys prior, and compare the results with the frequentist methods through some simulation experiments and one real data on daily rainfall in inches at Mount Washington, NH. Among Bayesian methods, our results show that the Jeffreys prior perform better in most of the situations for both the simulation and the rainfall data. Furthermore, among weakly informative priors considered, Student's t prior with 7 degrees of freedom fits the data most adequately.     

Kullback-Leibler divergence to evaluate posterior sensitivity to different priors for autoregressive time series models

In this paper we use the Kullback-Leibler divergence to measure the distance between the posteriors of the autoregressive (AR) model coefficients, aiming to evaluate mathematically the sensitivity of the coefficients posterior to different types of priors, i.e. Jeffreys’, g, and natural conjugate priors. In addition, we evaluate the impact of the posteriors distance in Bayesian estimates of mean and variance of the model coefficients by generating a large number of Monte Carlo simulations from the posteriors. Simulation study results show that the coefficients posterior is sensitive to prior distributions, and the posteriors distance has more influence on Bayesian estimates of variance than those of mean of the model coefficients. Same results are obtained from the application to real-world time series datasets.     

Noninformative priors for linear combinations of normal means with unequal variances

For normal populations with unequal variances, we develop matching priors and reference priors for a linear combination of the means. Here, we find three second-order matching priors: a highest posterior density (HPD) matching prior, a cumulative distribution function (CDF) matching prior, and a likelihood ratio (LR) matching prior. Furthermore, we show that the reference priors are all first-order matching priors, but that they do not satisfy the second-order matching criterion that establishes the symmetry and the unimodality of the posterior under the developed priors. The results of a simulation indicate that the second-order matching prior outperforms the reference priors in terms of matching the target coverage probabilities, in a frequentist sense. Finally, we compare the Bayesian credible intervals based on the developed priors with the confidence intervals derived from real data.     

Non-informative priors for the inverse Weibull distribution

In this paper, we develop the non-informative priors for the inverse Weibull model when the parameters of interest are the scale and the shape parameters. We develop the first-order and the second-order matching priors for both parameters. For the scale parameter, we reveal that the second-order matching prior is not a highest posterior density (HPD) matching prior, does not match the alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order and is not a cumulative distribution function (CDF) matching prior. Also for the shape parameter, we reveal that the second-order matching prior is an HPD matching prior and a CDF matching prior and also matches the alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order. For both parameters, we reveal that the one-at-a-time reference prior is the second-order matching prior, but Jeffreys’ prior is not the first-order and the second-order matching prior. A simulation study is performed to compare the target coverage probabilities and a real example is given.     

Noninformative priors for the generalized half-normal distribution

In this paper, we develop noninformative priors for the generalized half-normal distribution when scale and shape parameters are of interest, respectively. Especially, we develop the first and second order matching priors for both parameters. For the shape parameter, we reveal that the second order matching prior is a highest posterior density (HPD) matching prior and a cumulative distribution function (CDF) matching prior. In addition, it matches the alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order. For the scale parameter, we reveal that the second order matching prior is neither a HPD matching prior nor a CDF matching prior. Also, it does not match the alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order. For both parameters, we present that the one-at-a-time reference prior is a second order matching prior. However, Jeffreys’ prior is neither a first nor a second order matching prior. Methods are illustrated with both a simulation study and a real data set.     

A matching prior based on the modified profile likelihood in a generalized Weibull stress‐strength model

Bayesian inference of a generalized Weibull stress‐strength model (SSM) with more than one strength component is considered. For this problem, properly assigning priors for the reliabilities is challenging due to the presence of nuisance parameters. Matching priors, which are priors matching the posterior probabilities of certain regions with their frequentist coverage probabilities, are commonly used but difficult to derive in this problem. Instead, we apply an alternative method and derive a matching prior based on a modification of the profile likelihood. Simulation studies show that this proposed prior performs well in terms of frequentist coverage and estimation even when the sample sizes are minimal. The prior is applied to two real datasets. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 41: 83–97; 2013 © 2012 Statistical Society of Canada     

Objective Priors for Parameters in a Normal Linear Regression with Measurement Error

We investigate certain objective priors for the parameters in a normal linear regression models with one of the explanatory variables subject to measurement error. We first show that the use of the standard non informative prior for normal linear regression without measurement error leads to an improper posterior in the measurement error model. We then derive the Jeffreys prior and reference priors, and show that they lead to proper posteriors. We use simulation study to compare the frequentist performance of the estimates derived using these priors, and the MLE.     

A matching prior for the product of normal means based on the modified profile likelihood

In this paper, we develop a matching prior for the product of means in several normal distributions with unrestricted means and unknown variances. For this problem, properly assigning priors for the product of normal means has been issued because of the presence of nuisance parameters. Matching priors, which are priors matching the posterior probabilities of certain regions with their frequentist coverage probabilities, are commonly used but difficult to derive in this problem. We developed the first order probability matching priors for this problem; however, the developed matching priors are unproper. Thus, we apply an alternative method and derive a matching prior based on a modification of the profile likelihood. Simulation studies show that the derived matching prior performs better than the uniform prior and Jeffreys’ prior in meeting the target coverage probabilities, and meets well the target coverage probabilities even for the small sample sizes. In addition, to evaluate the validity of the proposed matching prior, Bayesian credible interval for the product of normal means using the matching prior is compared to Bayesian credible intervals using the uniform prior and Jeffrey’s prior, and the confidence interval using the method of Yfantis and Flatman.     

Propriety of posteriors in structured additive regression models: Theory and empirical evidence

Structured additive regression comprises many semiparametric regression models such as generalized additive (mixed) models, geoadditive models, and hazard regression models within a unified framework. In a Bayesian formulation, non-parametric functions, spatial effects and further model components are specified in terms of multivariate Gaussian priors for high-dimensional vectors of regression coefficients. For several model terms, such as penalized splines or Markov random fields, these Gaussian prior distributions involve rank-deficient precision matrices, yielding partially improper priors. Moreover, hyperpriors for the variances (corresponding to inverse smoothing parameters) may also be specified as improper, e.g. corresponding to Jeffreys prior or a flat prior for the standard deviation. Hence, propriety of the joint posterior is a crucial issue for full Bayesian inference in particular if based on Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations. We establish theoretical results providing sufficient (and sometimes necessary) conditions for propriety and provide empirical evidence through several accompanying simulation studies.     

On Bayesian estimators in multistage binomial designs

A new class of Bayesian estimators for a proportion in multistage binomial designs is considered. Priors belong to the beta-J distribution family, which is derived from the Fisher information associated with the design. The transposition of the beta parameters of the Haldane and the uniform priors in fixed binomial experiments into the beta-J distribution yields bias-corrected versions of these priors in multistage designs. We show that the estimator of the posterior mean based on the corrected Haldane prior and the estimator of the posterior mode based on the corrected uniform prior have good frequentist properties. An easy-to-use approximation of the estimator of the posterior mode is provided. The new Bayesian estimators are compared to Whitehead's and the uniformly minimum variance estimators through several multistage designs. Last, the bias of the estimator of the posterior mode is derived for a particular case.     

Objective priors for causal AR(p) with partial autocorrelations

We consider the problem of deriving formal objective priors for the causal/stationary autoregressive model of order p. We compare the frequentist behaviour of the most common default priors, namely the uniform (over the stationarity region) prior, the Jeffreys’ prior and the reference prior.