|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| '''Empirical Bayes methods''' are procedures for [[statistical inference]] in which the prior distribution is estimated from the data. This approach stands in contrast to standard
| | A little older video games ought to be discarded. They may be worth some money at a number of video retailers. Step buy and sell several game titles, you will likely get your upcoming distinction at no cost!<br><br>Video games are fun to have fun with your kids. This helps you learn much another recommendation of your kid's interests. Sharing interests with children like this can conjointly create great conversations. It also gives an opportunity to monitor growth and development of their skills.<br><br>This can be the ideal place the place you can uncover a useful and ample clash of clans special secrets hack tool. Using a single click on on a button, you can have a wonderful time in your Facebook/cell amusement and for no reason use up the steps you call for. Underneath is a get button for you to obtain Clash of Clans hack into now. In seconds, you will get crucial items and never have you stress over gems to coins all over again.<br><br>Guilds and clans have happened to be popular ever since the most beginning of first-person displayed shooter and MMORPG gambling. World of WarCraft develops individual concept with their exclusive World associated Warcraft guilds. A real guild can easily always try to be understood as a in players that band back down for companionship. People in the guild travel back together again for fun and adventure while improving in ordeal and gold.<br><br>This is my testing has apparent which experts state this appraisement algorithm training consists of a alternation of beeline band quests. They are not considered things to consider versions of arced graphs. I will explain so why later.<br><br>Courtesy of - borer on a boondocks anteroom you possibly can appearance added advice all about that play, scout, [http://www.contract.com/ contract] troops, or attack. Of course, these results will rely on what appearance of the hostilities you might be in.<br><br>Basically, it would alone acquiesce all of us so that you tune 2 volume points. If you appetite for you to single added than in which probably - as Supercell intensely acquainted t had already [http://www.all-Important-.org all-important -] you documents assorted beeline segments. If you cherished this article and you simply would like to get more info with regards to [http://prometeu.net clash of clans hack no survey download] kindly visit our own web page. Theoretically they could create a record of alike added bulk articles. If they capital to help allegation added or beneath for a 2 day skip, they may well calmly familiarize 1 added segment. |
| [[Bayesian probability|Bayesian methods]], for which the prior distribution is fixed before any data are observed. Despite this difference in perspective, empirical Bayes may be viewed as an approximation to a fully Bayesian treatment of a [[hierarchical Bayes model|hierarchical model]] wherein the parameters at the highest level of the hierarchy are set to their most likely values, instead of being integrated out. Empirical Bayes, also known as [[marginal likelihood|maximum marginal likelihood]],<ref name="Bishop05"/> represents one approach for setting [[hyperparameters]].
| |
| | |
| ==Introduction==
| |
| | |
| Empirical Bayes methods can be seen as an approximation to a fully Bayesian treatment of a [[hierarchical Bayes model]].
| |
| | |
| In, for example, a two-stage hierarchical Bayes model, observed data <math>y = \{y_1, y_2, \dots, y_N\}</math> are assumed to be generated from an unobserved set of parameters <math>\theta = \{\theta_1, \theta_2, \dots, \theta_n\}</math> according to a probability distribution <math>p(y|\theta)\,</math>. In turn, the parameters θ can be considered samples drawn from a population characterised by [[hyperparameters]] <math>\eta\,</math> according to a probability distribution <math>p(\theta|\eta)\,</math>. In the hierarchical Bayes model, though not in the empirical Bayes approximation, the hyperparameters <math>\eta\,</math> are considered to be drawn from an unparameterized distribution <math>p(\eta)\,</math>.
| |
| | |
| Information about a particular quantity of interest <math>\theta_i\;</math> therefore comes not only from the properties of those data which directly depend on it, but also from the properties of the population of parameters <math>\theta\;</math> as a whole, inferred from the data as a whole, summarised by the hyperparameters <math>\eta\;</math>.
| |
| | |
| Using [[Bayes' theorem]],
| |
| | |
| :<math>
| |
| p(\theta|y)
| |
| = \frac{p(y | \theta) p(\theta)}{p(y)}
| |
| = \frac {p(y | \theta)}{p(y)} \int p(\theta | \eta) p(\eta) \, d\eta \,.
| |
| </math>
| |
| | |
| In general, this integral will not be tractable analytically and must be evaluated by numerical methods. Stochastic approximations using, e.g., [[Markov Chain Monte Carlo]] sampling or deterministic approximations such as [[numerical integration|quadrature]] are common.{{Citation needed|date=February 2012}}
| |
| | |
| Alternatively, the expression can be written as
| |
| :<math>
| |
| \begin{align}
| |
| p(\theta|y)
| |
| & = \int p(\theta|\eta, y) p(\eta | y) \; d \eta
| |
| & = \int \frac{p(y | \theta) p(\theta | \eta)}{p(y | \eta)} p(\eta | y) \; d \eta\,,
| |
| \end{align}
| |
| </math>
| |
| and the term in the integral can in turn be expressed as
| |
| :<math>
| |
| p(\eta | y) = \int p(\eta | \theta) p(\theta | y) \; d \theta .
| |
| </math>
| |
| | |
| These suggest an iterative scheme, qualitatively similar in structure to a [[Gibbs sampler]], to evolve successively improved approximations to <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math> and <math>p(\eta|y)\;</math>. First, calculate an initial approximation to <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math> ignoring the <math>\eta</math> dependence completely; then calculate an approximation to <math>p(\eta|y)\;</math> based upon the initial approximate distribution of <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math>; then use this <math>p(\eta|y)\;</math> to update the approximation for <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math>; then update <math>p(\eta|y)\;</math>; and so on.
| |
| | |
| When the true distribution <math>p(\eta|y)\;</math> is sharply peaked, the integral determining <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math> may be not much changed by replacing the probability distribution over <math>\eta\;</math> with a point estimate <math>\eta^{*}\;</math> representing the distribution's peak (or, alternatively, its mean),
| |
| :<math>
| |
| p(\theta|y) \simeq \frac{p(y | \theta) \; p(\theta | \eta^{*})}{p(y | \eta^{*})}\,.
| |
| </math>
| |
| With this approximation, the above iterative scheme becomes the [[EM algorithm]].
| |
| | |
| The term "Empirical Bayes" can cover a wide variety of methods, but most can be regarded as an early truncation of either the above scheme or something quite like it. Point estimates, rather than the whole distribution, are typically used for the parameter(s) <math>\eta\;</math>. The estimates for <math>\eta^{*}\;</math> are typically made from the first approximation to <math>p(\theta|y)\;</math> without subsequent refinement. These estimates for <math>\eta^{*}\;</math> are usually made without considering an appropriate prior distribution for <math>\eta</math>.
| |
| | |
| ==Point estimation==
| |
| <!-- where the "INTUITIVE", not-algebraic examples!????? -->
| |
| | |
| ===Robbins method : non-parametric empirical Bayes (NPEB)===
| |
| | |
| Robbins<ref name=Robbins/> considered a case of sampling from a [[compound distribution]], where probability for each <math>y_i</math> (conditional on <math>\theta_i</math>) is specified by a [[Poisson distribution]],
| |
| | |
| :<math>p(y_i|\theta_i)={{\theta_i}^{y_i} e^{-\theta_i} \over {y_i}!}</math>
| |
| | |
| while the prior is unspecified except that it is also [[i.i.d.]] from an unknown distribution, with [[cumulative distribution function]] <math>G(\theta)</math>). Compound sampling arises in a variety of statistical estimation problems, such as accident rates and clinical trials.{{Citation needed|date=February 2012}} We simply seek a point prediction of <math>\theta_i</math> given all the observed data. Because the prior is unspecified, we seek to do this without knowledge of ''G''.<ref name=CL/>
| |
| | |
| Under [[squared error loss]] (SEL), the [[conditional expectation]] ''E''(θ<sub>''i''</sub> | ''Y''<sub>''i''</sub> = ''y''<sub>''i''</sub>) is a reasonable quantity to use for prediction. For the Poisson compound sampling model, this quantity is
| |
| | |
| :<math>\operatorname{E}(\theta_i|y_i) = {\int (\theta^{y+1} e^{-\theta} / {y_i}!)\,dG(\theta) \over {\int (\theta^y e^{-\theta} / {y_i}!)\,dG(\theta}) }.</math>
| |
| | |
| This can be simplified by multiplying the expression by <math>({y_i}+1)/({y_i}+1)</math>, yielding
| |
| | |
| :<math> \operatorname{E}(\theta_i|y_i)= {{(y_i + 1) p_G(y_i + 1) }\over {p_G(y_i)}},</math>
| |
| | |
| where ''p<sub>G</sub>'' is the marginal distribution obtained by integrating out ''θ'' over ''G''.
| |
| | |
| To take advantage of this, Robbins<ref name=Robbins/> suggested estimating the marginals with their empirical frequencies, yielding the fully non-parametric estimate as:
| |
| | |
| :<math> \operatorname{E}(\theta_i|y_i) \approx (y_i + 1) { {\#\{Y_j = y_i + 1\}} \over {\#\{ Y_j = y_i\}} },</math>
| |
| | |
| where <math>\#</math> denotes "number of". (See also [[Good–Turing frequency estimation]].)
| |
| | |
| ;Example - Accident rates
| |
| | |
| Suppose each customer of an insurance company has an "accident rate" Θ and is insured against accidents; the probability distribution of Θ is the underlying distribution, and is unknown. The number of accidents suffered by each customer in a specified time period has a [[Poisson distribution]] with expected value equal to the particular customer's accident rate. The actual number of accidents experienced by a customer is the observable quantity. A crude way to estimate the underlying probability distribution of the accident rate Θ is to estimate the proportion of members of the whole population suffering 0, 1, 2, 3, ... accidents during the specified time period as the corresponding proportion in the observed random sample. Having done so, it is then desired to predict the accident rate of each customer in the sample. As above, one may use the [[conditional probability|conditional]] [[expected value]] of the accident rate Θ given the observed number of accidents during the baseline period. Thus, if a customer suffers six accidents during the baseline period, that customer's estimated accident rate is 7 × [the proportion of the sample who suffered 7 accidents] / [the proportion of the sample who suffered 6 accidents]. Note that if the proportion of people suffering ''k'' accidents is a decreasing function of ''k'', the customer's predicted accident rate will often be lower than their observed number of accidents. This shrinkage effect is typical of empirical Bayes analyses.
| |
| | |
| ===Parametric empirical Bayes===
| |
| | |
| If the likelihood and its prior take on simple parametric forms (such as 1- or 2-dimensional likelihood functions with simple [[conjugate prior]]s), then the empirical Bayes problem is only to estimate the marginal <math>m(y|\eta)</math> and the hyperparameters <math>\eta</math> using the complete set of empirical measurements. For example, one common approach, called parametric empirical Bayes point estimation, is to approximate the marginal using the [[maximum likelihood estimate]] (MLE), or a [[Moment (mathematics)|Moments]] expansion, which allows one to express the hyperparameters <math>\eta</math> in terms of the empirical mean and variance. This simplified marginal allows one to plug in the empirical averages into a point estimate for the prior <math>\theta</math>. The resulting equation for the prior <math>\theta</math> is greatly simplified, as shown below.
| |
| | |
| There are several common parametric empirical Bayes models, including the [[Poisson–gamma model]] (below), the [[Beta-binomial model]], the [[Gaussian–Gaussian model]], the [[Dirichlet-multinomial distribution|Dirichlet-multinomial model]], as well specific models for [[Bayesian linear regression]] (see below) and [[Bayesian multivariate linear regression]]. More advanced approaches include [[hierarchical Bayes model]]s and [[Bayesian mixture model]]s.
| |
| | |
| ====Poisson–gamma model====
| |
| | |
| For example, in the example above, let the likelihood be a [[Poisson distribution]], and let the prior now be specified by the [[conjugate prior]], which is a [[gamma distribution]] (<math>G(\alpha,\beta)</math>) (where <math>\eta = (\alpha,\beta)</math>):
| |
| | |
| :<math> \rho(\theta|\alpha,\beta) = \frac{\theta^{\alpha-1}\, e^{-\theta / \beta} }{\beta^{\alpha} \Gamma(\alpha)} \ \mathrm{for}\ \theta > 0, \alpha > 0, \beta > 0 \,\! .</math>
| |
| | |
| It is straightforward to show the posterior is also a gamma distribution. Write
| |
| | |
| :<math> \rho(\theta|y) \propto \rho(y|\theta) \rho(\theta|\alpha, \beta) ,</math>
| |
| | |
| where the marginal distribution has been omitted since it does not depend explicitly on <math>\theta</math>.
| |
| Expanding terms which do depend on <math>\theta</math> gives the posterior as:
| |
| | |
| :<math> \rho(\theta|y) \propto (\theta^{y}\, e^{-\theta}) (\theta^{\alpha-1}\, e^{-\theta / \beta}) = \theta^{y+ \alpha -1}\, e^{- \theta (1+1 / \beta)} . </math>
| |
| | |
| So the posterior density is also a [[gamma distribution]] <math>G(\alpha',\beta')</math>, where <math>\alpha' = y + \alpha</math>, and <math>\beta' = (1+1 / \beta)^{-1}</math>. Also notice that the marginal is simply the integral of the posterior over all <math>\Theta</math>, which turns out to be a [[negative binomial distribution]].
| |
| | |
| To apply empirical Bayes, we will approximate the marginal using the [[maximum likelihood]] estimate (MLE). But since the posterior is a gamma distribution, the MLE of the marginal turns out to be just the mean of the posterior, which is the point estimate <math>\operatorname{E}(\theta|y)</math> we need. Recalling that the mean <math>\mu</math> of a gamma distribution <math>G(\alpha', \beta')</math> is simply <math>\alpha' \beta'</math>, we have
| |
| | |
| :<math> \operatorname{E}(\theta|y) = \alpha' \beta' = \frac{\bar{y}+\alpha}{1+1 / \beta} = \frac{\beta}{1+\beta}\bar{y} + \frac{1}{1+\beta} (\alpha \beta). </math>
| |
| | |
| To obtain the values of <math>\alpha</math> and <math>\beta</math>, empirical Bayes prescribes estimating mean <math>\alpha\beta</math> and variance <math>\alpha\beta^2</math> using the complete set of empirical data.
| |
| | |
| The resulting point estimate <math> \operatorname{E}(\theta|y) </math> is therefore like a weighted average of the sample mean <math>\bar{y}</math> and the prior mean <math>\mu = \alpha\beta</math>. This turns out to be a general feature of empirical Bayes; the point estimates for the prior (i.e. mean) will look like a weighted averages of the sample estimate and the prior estimate (likewise for estimates of the variance).
| |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| * [[Bayes estimator]]
| |
| * [[Bayes' theorem]]
| |
| * [[Bayesian approaches to brain function]]
| |
| * [[Bayesian probability]]
| |
| * [[Best linear unbiased prediction]]
| |
| * [[Conditional probability]]
| |
| * [[Monty Hall problem]]
| |
| * [[Posterior probability]]
| |
| * [[Robbins lemma]]
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| {{More footnotes|date=February 2012}}
| |
| | |
| {{reflist|refs=
| |
| | |
| <ref name="Bishop05">C.M. Bishop (2005). ''Neural networks for pattern recognition''. Oxford University Press ISBN 0-19-853864-2</ref>
| |
| | |
| <ref name=Robbins>{{cite journal
| |
| |last=Robbins|first=Herbert|authorlink=Herbert Robbins
| |
| |year=1956
| |
| |title=An Empirical Bayes Approach to Statistics
| |
| |journal=Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume 1: Contributions to the Theory of Statistics
| |
| |pages=157–163
| |
| |url=http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bsmsp/1200501653|accessdate=2008-03-15
| |
| |mr=0084919
| |
| }}</ref>
| |
| | |
| <ref name=CL>{{cite book|last=Carlin|first=Bradley P.|coauthors=Louis, Thomas A.|title=Bayes and Empirical Bayes Methods for Data Analysis|publisher=Chapman & Hall/CRC|year=2000|edition=2nd|isbn=1-58488-170-4|pages= Sec. 3.2 and Appendix B }}</ref>
| |
| | |
| }}
| |
| | |
| ==Further reading==
| |
| * Peter E. Rossi, Greg M. Allenby, and Robert McCulloch, ''Bayesian Statistics and Marketing'', John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2006
| |
| * {{cite journal
| |
| |last=Casella|first=George
| |
| |title=An Introduction to Empirical Bayes Data Analysis
| |
| |journal=American Statistician
| |
| |publisher=American Statistical Association
| |
| |volume=39|issue=2|date=May 1985|pages=83–87
| |
| | mr = 0789118
| |
| |doi=10.2307/2682801
| |
| |jstor=2682801
| |
| }}
| |
| * {{cite journal
| |
| |last=Nikulin|first=Mikhail
| |
| |title=Bernstein's regularity conditions in a problem of empirical Bayesian approach
| |
| |journal=Journal of Soviet Mathematics,
| |
| |volume=36|issue=5|year=1987|pages=596–600.
| |
| |doi=10.1007/BF01093293
| |
| }}
| |
| | |
| ==External links==
| |
| * [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http://ca.geocities.com/hauer%40rogers.com/Pubs/TRBpaper.pdf&date=2009-10-25+03:03:10 Use of empirical Bayes Method in estimating road safety (North America)]
| |
| * [http://www2.math.uu.se/research/pub/Brandel.pdf Empirical Bayes methods for missing data analysis]
| |
| * [http://it.stlawu.edu/~msch/biometrics/papers.htm Using the Beta-Binomial distribution to assess performance of a biometric identification device]
| |
| *[http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/7/514/abstract/ A Hierarchical Naive Bayes Classifiers] (for continuous and [http://labmedinfo.org/download/lmi339.pdf discrete] variables).
| |
| | |
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Empirical Bayes Method}}
| |
| [[Category:Non-parametric Bayesian methods]]
| |