2017
DOI: 10.1002/sta4.163
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fast and accurate Bayesian model criticism and conflict diagnostics using R‐INLA

Abstract: Bayesian hierarchical models are increasingly popular for realistic modelling and analysis of complex data. This trend is accompanied by the need for flexible, general and computationally efficient methods for model criticism and conflict detection. Usually, a Bayesian hierarchical model incorporates a grouping of the individual data points, as, for example, with individuals in repeated measurement data. In such cases, the following question arises: Are any of the groups "outliers," or in conflict with the rem… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Further open questions in this area include how to improve power to detect conflict, and how to make such methods more accessible by improving the computational feasibility of systematic conflict assessment. As with any cross-validatory framework, multiple node-splitting can be computationally burdensome, so for hierarchical models, (Ferkingstad et al, 2017) have proposed an INLA approach to fast conflict diagnostics. A final area of open research related to understanding the influence of different, potentially conflicting, evidence sources on inference is the adaptation of value of information methods to evidence synthesis (Jackson et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further open questions in this area include how to improve power to detect conflict, and how to make such methods more accessible by improving the computational feasibility of systematic conflict assessment. As with any cross-validatory framework, multiple node-splitting can be computationally burdensome, so for hierarchical models, (Ferkingstad et al, 2017) have proposed an INLA approach to fast conflict diagnostics. A final area of open research related to understanding the influence of different, potentially conflicting, evidence sources on inference is the adaptation of value of information methods to evidence synthesis (Jackson et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To consider the potential influence of tree height and fire history on our results we re‐ran the model outlined above using tree height instead of tree canopy type and fire history instead of NMDS axis 2. Various assessment criteria for our global model suggested a good model fit, including a Watanabe–Akaike Information Criterion (a Bayesian equivalent of the well‐known AIC) of −14,484, Deviance Information Criterion −14,100 and conditional predictive ordination −3763 (Ferkingstad, Held, & Rue, ). Using the Bayesian framework, we assessed the support for the importance of each fixed factor in the model by examining the 95% credible intervals around the posterior mean.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We implemented hierarchical Bayesian spatiotemporal models with the r‐inla package (Rue et al, 2009, 2017), using the default and recommended settings for priors (Held, Schrödle, & Rue, 2010) and the ‘ laplace ’ (most accurate) approximation to estimate the posterior marginal distributions of all model random effects and parameters (Martins, Simpson, Lindgren, & Rue, 2013). To select the best candidate models, we evaluated different combinations of spatiotemporal correlation structures and mesh designs, based on cross‐validated predictive ordinate values (Ferkingstad, Held, & Rue, 2017). We created four mesh designs using the constrained refined Delauney triangulation applied to sampling site locations, by varying the sizes of triangles within and outside the sampled area (Figure ), attempting to minimize any boundary effects (Lindgren & Rue, 2015).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%