Noninformative priors for linear combinations of the normal means

In this paper, we develop noninformative priors for linear combinations of the means under the normal populations. It turns out that among the reference priors the one-at-a-time reference prior satisfies a second order probability matching criterion. Moreover, the second order probability matching priors match alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order and are also HPD matching priors. Our simulation study indicates that the one-at-a-time reference prior performs better than the other reference priors in terms of matching the target coverage probabilities in a frequentist sense.     

Noninformative priors for the normal variance ratio

In this paper, we consider noninformative priors for the ratio of variances in two normal populations. We develop first and second order matching priors. We find that the second order matching prior matches alternative coverage probabilities up to the second order and is also a HPD matching prior. It turns out that among the reference priors, only one-at-a-time reference prior satisfies a second order matching criterion. Our simulation study indicates that the one-at-a-time reference prior performs better than other reference priors in terms of matching the target coverage probabilities in a frequentist sense. This work is supported by Korea Research Foundation Grant (KRF-2004-002-C00041).     

Reference priors for a product of normal means when variances are unknown

The reference priors of Berger and Bernardo (1992) are derived for normal populations with unknown variances when the product of means is of interest. The priors are also shown to be Tibshirani's (1989) matching priors.     

Combining coordinates in simultaneous estimation of normal means

The problem of combining coordinates in Stein-type estimators, when simultaneously estimating normal means, is considered. The question of deciding whether to use all coordinates in one combined shrinkage estimator or to separate into groups and use separate shrinkage estimators on each group is considered. A Bayesian viewpoint is (of necessity) taken, and it is shown that the ‘combined’ estimator is, somewhat surprisingly, often superior.     

Pseudo confidence regions for the solution of a multivariate linear functional relationship

The problem of finding confidence regions (CR) for a q-variate vector γ given as the solution of a linear functional relationship (LFR) Λγ = μ is investigated. Here an m-variate vector μ and an m × q matrix Λ = (Λ₁, Λ₂,…, Λ_q) are unknown population means of an m(q+1)-variate normal distribution $\text{N}{}_{\mathrm{m(q+1)}}\text{(ζΩ?Σ)}$, where ζ′ = (μ′, Λ₁′, Λ₂′,…, Λ_q′Σ is an unknown, symmetric and positive definite m × m matrix and Ω is a known, symmetric and positive definite (q+1) × (q+1) matrix and ? denotes the Kronecker product. This problem is a generalization of the univariate special case for the ratio of normal means.A CR for γ with level of confidence 1 ? α, is given by a quadratic inequality, which yields the so-called ‘pseudo’ confidence regions (PCR) valid conditionally in subsets of the parameter space. Our discussion is focused on the ‘bounded pseudo’ confidence region (BPCR) given by the interior of a hyperellipsoid. The two conditions necessary for a BPCR to exist are shown to be the consistency conditions concerning the multivariate LFR. The probability that these conditions hold approaches one under ‘reasonable circumstances’ in many practical situations. Hence, we may have a BPCR with confidence approximately 1 ? α. Some simulation results are presented.     

A comparison of Monte Carlo methods for computing marginal likelihoods of item response theory models

Nowadays, Bayesian methods are routinely used for estimating parameters of item response theory (IRT) models. However, the marginal likelihoods are still rarely used for comparing IRT models due to their complexity and a relatively high dimension of the model parameters. In this paper, we review Monte Carlo (MC) methods developed in the literature in recent years and provide a detailed development of how these methods are applied to the IRT models. In particular, we focus on the “best possible” implementation of these MC methods for the IRT models. These MC methods are used to compute the marginal likelihoods under the one-parameter IRT model with the logistic link (1PL model) and the two-parameter logistic IRT model (2PL model) for a real English Examination dataset. We further use the widely applicable information criterion (WAIC) and deviance information criterion (DIC) to compare the 1PL model and the 2PL model. The 2PL model is favored by all of these three Bayesian model comparison criteria for the English Examination data.