Default Bayesian analysis of the Behrens–Fisher problem

In the Bayesian approach, the Behrens–Fisher problem has been posed as one of estimation for the difference of two means. No Bayesian solution to the Behrens–Fisher testing problem has yet been given due, perhaps, to the fact that the conventional priors used are improper. While default Bayesian analysis can be carried out for estimation purposes, it poses difficulties for testing problems. This paper generates sensible intrinsic and fractional prior distributions for the Behrens–Fisher testing problem from the improper priors commonly used for estimation. It allows us to compute the Bayes factor to compare the null and the alternative hypotheses. This default procedure of model selection is compared with a frequentist test and the Bayesian information criterion. We find discrepancy in the sense that frequentist and Bayesian information criterion reject the null hypothesis for data, that the Bayes factor for intrinsic or fractional priors do not.     

Bayesian testing of an exponential point null hypothesis

The problem of testing a point null hypothesis involving an exponential mean is The problem of testing a point null hypothesis involving an exponential mean is usual interpretation of P-values as evidence against precise hypotheses is faulty. As in Berger and Delampady (1986) and Berger and Sellke (1987), lower bounds on Bayesian measures of evidence over wide classes of priors are found emphasizing the conflict between posterior probabilities and P-values. A hierarchical Bayes approach is also considered as an alternative to computing lower bounds and “automatic” Bayesian significance tests which further illustrates the point that P-values are highly misleading measures of evidence for tests of point null hypotheses.     

Alternative Bayes factors for model selection

Several alternative Bayes factors have been recently proposed in order to solve the problem of the extreme sensitivity of the Bayes factor to the priors of models under comparison. Specifically, the impossibility of using the Bayes factor with standard noninformative priors for model comparison has led to the introduction of new automatic criteria, such as the posterior Bayes factor (Aitkin 1991), the intrinsic Bayes factors (Berger and Pericchi 1996b) and the fractional Bayes factor (O'Hagan 1995). We derive some interesting properties of the fractional Bayes factor that provide justifications for its use additional to the ones given by O'Hagan. We further argue that the use of the fractional Bayes factor, originally introduced to cope with improper priors, is also useful in a robust analysis. Finally, using usual classes of priors, we compare several alternative Bayes factors for the problem of testing the point null hypothesis in the univariate normal model.     

BAYESIAN TESTS FOR SOME PRECISE HYPOTHESES ON MULTI-NORMAL MEANS

Bayesian counterparts of some standard tests concerning the means of multi-normal distribution are discussed. In particular the hypothesis that the multi-normal mean is equal to a specified value, and the hypothesis that the means are equal. Lower bounds on the Bayes factor in favour of the null hypothesis are obtained over the class of conjugate priors. The P-value, or observed significance level of the standard sampling-theoretic test procedure are compared with the posterior probability. The results correspond closely with those of Good (1967), Berger & Sellke (1987), Pepple (1988) and others and illustrate the conflict between posterior probabilities and P-values as measures of evidence.     

Bayesian approach to change point problems

A Bayesian approach is considered to study the change point problems. A hypothesis for testing change versus no change is considered using the notion of predictive distributions. Bayes factors are developed for change versus no change in the exponential families of distributions with conjugate priors. Under vague prior information, both Bayes factors and pseudo Bayes factors are considered. A new result is developed which describes how the overall Bayes factor has a decomposition into Bayes factors at each point. Finally, an example is provided in which the computations are performed using the concept of imaginary observations.     

A bayesian analysis of the multinomial model for a dichotomous response with nonrespondents

This paper studies the mu1tinomial model 2x2 contingency table data with some cell counts missing .Various hypotheses of interest including row-column independence are tested by using Bayes factors which represent the ratio of the posterior odds to the prior odds for the null hypothesis. The Dirichlet-Beta family of prior distributions is considered for the multinomial parameters cond itional on the complement of the null hypothesis. The Bayes factor for the incomplete data is a mixture of the Bayes factors for different possibilities for the full data.     

A Bayesian analysis for the multivariate point null testing problem

A Bayesian test for the point null testing problem in the multivariate case is developed. A procedure to get the mixed distribution using the prior density is suggested. For comparisons between the Bayesian and classical approaches, lower bounds on posterior probabilities of the null hypothesis, over some reasonable classes of prior distributions, are computed and compared with the p-value of the classical test. With our procedure, a better approximation is obtained because the p-value is in the range of the Bayesian measures of evidence.     

Bayesian inference method for model validation and confidence extrapolation

This paper presents a Bayesian-hypothesis-testing-based methodology for model validation and confidence extrapolation under uncertainty, using limited test data. An explicit expression of the Bayes factor is derived for the interval hypothesis testing. The interval method is compared with the Bayesian point null hypothesis testing approach. The Bayesian network with Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation and Gibbs sampling is explored for extrapolating the inference from the validated domain at the component level to the untested domain at the system level. The effect of the number of experiments on the confidence in the model validation decision is investigated. The probabilities of Type I and Type II errors in decision-making during the model validation and confidence extrapolation are quantified. The proposed methodologies are applied to a structural mechanics problem. Numerical results demonstrate that the Bayesian methodology provides a quantitative approach to facilitate rational decisions in model validation and confidence extrapolation under uncertainty.     

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.     

On the Use of Bayes Factor in Frequentist Testing of a Precise Hypothesis

This article deals with Bayes factors as useful Bayesian tools in frequentist testing of a precise hypothesis. A result and several examples are included to justify the definition of Bayes factor for point null hypotheses, without merging the initial distribution with a degenerate distribution on the null hypothesis. Of special interest is the problem of testing a proportion (joint with a natural criterion to compare different tests), the possible presence of nuisance parameters, or the influence of Bayesian sufficiency on this problem. The problem of testing a precise hypothesis under a Bayesian perspective is also considered and two alternative methods to deal with are given.     

Bayesian Analysis of the Proportional Hazards Model with Time‐Varying Coefficients

We study a Bayesian analysis of the proportional hazards model with time‐varying coefficients. We consider two priors for time‐varying coefficients – one based on B‐spline basis functions and the other based on Gamma processes – and we use a beta process prior for the baseline hazard functions. We show that the two priors provide optimal posterior convergence rates (up to the term) and that the Bayes factor is consistent for testing the assumption of the proportional hazards when the two priors are used for an alternative hypothesis. In addition, adaptive priors are considered for theoretical investigation, in which the smoothness of the true function is assumed to be unknown, and prior distributions are assigned based on B‐splines.     

Equality and inequality constrained multivariate linear models: Objective model selection using constrained posterior priors

In objective Bayesian model selection, a well-known problem is that standard non-informative prior distributions cannot be used to obtain a sensible outcome of the Bayes factor because these priors are improper. The use of a small part of the data, i.e., a training sample, to obtain a proper posterior prior distribution has become a popular method to resolve this issue and seems to result in reasonable outcomes of default Bayes factors, such as the intrinsic Bayes factor or a Bayes factor based on the empirical expected-posterior prior.     

The use of local and nonlocal priors in Bayesian test-based monitoring for single-arm phase II clinical trials

Bayesian sequential monitoring is widely used in adaptive phase II studies where the objective is to examine whether an experimental drug is efficacious. Common approaches for Bayesian sequential monitoring are based on posterior or predictive probabilities and Bayesian hypothesis testing procedures using Bayes factors. In the first part of the paper, we briefly show the connections between test-based (TB) and posterior probability-based (PB) sequential monitoring approaches. Next, we extensively investigate the choice of local and nonlocal priors for the TB monitoring procedure. We describe the pros and cons of different priors in terms of operating characteristics. We also develop a user-friendly Shiny application to implement the TB design.     

Robust Bayesian methodology with applications in credibility premium derivation and future claim size prediction

Robust Bayesian methodology deals with the problem of explaining uncertainty of the inputs (the prior, the model, and the loss function) and provides a breakthrough way to take into account the input’s variation. If the uncertainty is in terms of the prior knowledge, robust Bayesian analysis provides a way to consider the prior knowledge in terms of a class of priors \(\varGamma \) and derive some optimal rules. In this paper, we motivate utilizing robust Bayes methodology under the asymmetric general entropy loss function in insurance and pursue two main goals, namely (i) computing premiums and (ii) predicting a future claim size. To achieve the goals, we choose some classes of priors and deal with (i) Bayes and posterior regret gamma minimax premium computation, (ii) Bayes and posterior regret gamma minimax prediction of a future claim size under the general entropy loss. We also perform a prequential analysis and compare the performance of posterior regret gamma minimax predictors against the Bayes predictors.     

Restricted most powerful Bayesian tests for linear models

Uniformly most powerful Bayesian tests (UMPBTs) are a new class of Bayesian tests in which null hypotheses are rejected if their Bayes factor exceeds a specified threshold. The alternative hypotheses in UMPBTs are defined to maximize the probability that the null hypothesis is rejected. Here, we generalize the notion of UMPBTs by restricting the class of alternative hypotheses over which this maximization is performed, resulting in restricted most powerful Bayesian tests (RMPBTs). We then derive RMPBTs for linear models by restricting alternative hypotheses to g priors. For linear models, the rejection regions of RMPBTs coincide with those of usual frequentist F‐tests, provided that the evidence thresholds for the RMPBTs are appropriately matched to the size of the classical tests. This correspondence supplies default Bayes factors for many common tests of linear hypotheses. We illustrate the use of RMPBTs for ANOVA tests and t‐tests and compare their performance in numerical studies.     

Wavelet Shrinkage with Double Weibull Prior

In this article, we propose a denoising methodology in the wavelet domain based on a Bayesian hierarchical model using Double Weibull prior. We propose two estimators, one based on posterior mean (Double Weibull Wavelet Shrinker, DWWS) and the other based on larger posterior mode (DWWS-LPM), and show how to calculate them efficiently. Traditionally, mixture priors have been used for modeling sparse wavelet coefficients. The interesting feature of this article is the use of non-mixture prior. We show that the methodology provides good denoising performance, comparable even to state-of-the-art methods that use mixture priors and empirical Bayes setting of hyperparameters, which is demonstrated by extensive simulations on standardly used test functions. An application to real-word dataset is also considered.     

Weibull inference using trimmed samples and prior information

Trimmed samples are commonly used in several branches of statistical methodology, especially when the presence of contaminated data is suspected. Assuming that certain proportions of the smallest and largest observations from a Weibull sample are unknown or have been eliminated, a Bayesian approach to point and interval estimation of the scale parameter, as well as hypothesis testing and prediction, is presented. In many cases, the use of substantial prior information can significantly increase the quality of the inferences and reduce the amount of testing required. Some Bayes estimators and predictors are derived in closed-forms. Highest posterior density estimators and credibility intervals can be computed using iterative methods. Bayes rules for testing one- and two-sided hypotheses are also provided. An illustrative numerical example is included.     

Higher order asymptotic computation of Bayesian significance tests for precise null hypotheses in the presence of nuisance parameters

The full Bayesian significance test (FBST) was introduced by Pereira and Stern for measuring the evidence of a precise null hypothesis. The FBST requires both numerical optimization and multidimensional integration, whose computational cost may be heavy when testing a precise null hypothesis on a scalar parameter of interest in the presence of a large number of nuisance parameters. In this paper we propose a higher order approximation of the measure of evidence for the FBST, based on tail area expansions of the marginal posterior of the parameter of interest. When in particular focus is on matching priors, further results are highlighted. Numerical illustrations are discussed.     

Objective priors for hypothesis testing in one-way random effects models

The Bayes factor is a key tool in hypothesis testing. Nevertheless, the important issue of which priors should be used to develop objective Bayes factors remains open. The authors consider this problem in the context of the one-way random effects model. They use concepts such as orthogonality, predictive matching and invariance to justify a specific form of the priors for common parameters and derive the intrinsic and divergence based prior for the new parameter. The authors show that both intrinsic priors or divergence-based priors produce consistent Bayes factors. They illustrate the methods and compare them with other proposals.     

INTRINSIC PRIORS FOR TWO-SAMPLE TESTS IN NORMAL POPULATIONS

ABSTRACT

There have been considerable amounts of work regarding the development of various default Bayes factors in model selection and hypothesis testing. Two commonly used criteria, the intrinsic Bayes factor and the fractional Bayes factor are compared to test two independent normal means and variances. We also derive several intrinsic priors whose Bayes factors are asymptotically equivalent to the respective Bayes factors. We demonstrate our results in simulated datasets.