1996
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4612-0717-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical Bayesian Methods Applied to Signal Processing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
189
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 316 publications
(191 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
189
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The results we obtain differ substantially from previous analyses. The posterior distribution suggests around 40 changepoints, which is roughly three times as many as assumed byÓ Ruanaidh and Fitzgerald (1996). Fearnhead and Clifford (2003) only infer 16 changepoints.…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The results we obtain differ substantially from previous analyses. The posterior distribution suggests around 40 changepoints, which is roughly three times as many as assumed byÓ Ruanaidh and Fitzgerald (1996). Fearnhead and Clifford (2003) only infer 16 changepoints.…”
mentioning
confidence: 72%
“…An example of well-log data, which comes fromÓ Ruanaidh and Fitzgerald (1996), is given in Figure 1. The data consist of measurements of the nuclear-magnetic response of underground rocks.…”
Section: Well-log Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We first run Gibbs sampling on the model to propose a numerical approximation of Pr(S 0 j y) (Ruanaidh and Fitzgerald, 1996;Gelman et al, 1998) and successively sample each variable given the set of remaining variables. To allow for burnin effect, we discard the first half of the samples and only keep the second half for consideration, that we note (S 0 [l] ), l = 1,. .…”
Section: Numerical Samplingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2)) and thus presents a challenging numerical task. Standard techniques like thermodynamic integration [19] are extremely computationally expensive which makes evidence evaluation typically at least an order of magnitude more costly than parameter estimation. Some fast approximate methods have been used for evidence evaluation, such as treating the posterior as a multivariate Gaussian centred at its peak (see, for example, [20]), but this approximation is clearly a poor one for highly non-Gaussian and multi-modal posteriors.…”
Section: Bayesian Inferencementioning
confidence: 99%