Advanced empirical process modeling methods such as those used for process monitoring and data reconciliation rely on information about the nature of noise in the measured variables. Because this likelihood information is often unavailable for many practical problems, approaches based on repeated measurements or process constraints have been developed for their estimation. Such approaches are limited by data availability and often lack theoretical rigor. In this article, a novel Bayesian approach is proposed to tackle this problem. Uncertainty about the error variances is incorporated in the Bayesian framework by setting noninformative priors for the noise variances. This general strategy is used to modify the Sampling-based Bayesian Latent Variable Regression (Chen et al., J Chemom., 2007) In response to this challenge, many efforts have devised ways of obtaining likelihood information from measured data and other sources. For example, Leger et al. 7 have proposed to estimate the error covariance matrices from repeated measurements and use the estimated covariance matrices in MLPCA. This method is applicable only when enough replicated measurements are available, which may not happen very often due to higher experimentation costs. Research on data reconciliation has also focused on methods for estimating the error covariance for weighting the objective function. 8 The error covariance matrices are usually directly estimated based on the measurements similar to the method used by Leger et al. 7 or indirectly estimated by incorporating additional process information. Almasy et al. and Mah 9 estimated the error covariance matrices from the constraint residuals of process data. Based on their work, Darouach et al.10 used a maximum likelihood estimator to estimate the error variances by solving a nonlinear optimization problem that couples the estimation problem with the data reconciliation problem. Keller et al. 11 further extended this approach to estimate both the variances and covariances of measurement error. Because these methods are sensitive to outliers, Chen et al. 12 developed an M-estimator to estimate the error covariance matrices. In this approach, the observations are weighted based on their Mahalanobis distances, hence the M-estimator is more robust. Morad et al. 13 developed another robust M-estimator which directly estimates the covariance matrices from the measurements. Maquin et al.14 applied a direct method to simultaneously estimate the variances of measurement errors and reconcile the data with respect to balance equations. Mirabedini and Hodouin 15 used a statespace model to estimate the variance and covariance of sampling errors in complex dynamic mineral systems. These methods often rely on known process constraints, such as mass balance; however, constraints may not be available or may not even exist for a given process data set. Furthermore, methods like those discussed in this paragraph can be computationally expensive due to the need for mathematical programming algorithms. These ha...