带有 LOO 或 WAIC 差异置信区间的混合效应位置尺度模型的模型选择。

IF 3.5 3区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Multivariate Behavioral Research Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1080/00273171.2025.2462033
Yue Liu, Fan Fang, Hongyun Liu
{"title":"带有 LOO 或 WAIC 差异置信区间的混合效应位置尺度模型的模型选择。","authors":"Yue Liu, Fan Fang, Hongyun Liu","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2025.2462033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>LOO (Leave-One-Out cross-validation) and WAIC (Widely Applicable Information Criterion) are widely used for model selection in Bayesian statistics. Most studies select the model with the smallest value based on point estimates, often without considering the differences in fit indices or the uncertainty of the estimates. To address this gap, we propose a sequential method for comparing models based on confidence intervals for <math><mi>Δ</mi><mtext>LOO</mtext></math> or <math><mi>Δ</mi><mtext>WAIC.</mtext></math> A simulation study was conducted to evaluate this method in selecting mixed-effects location-scale models (MELSMs). Our study revealed that the sequential methods, especially when using a 90% confidence interval, achieved a higher accuracy rate of model selection compared to the point method when the true model was simple, had a large magnitude of random intercept in the scale model, or had a large sample size. Models selected by the sequential methods demonstrated higher power, narrower credible interval width, smaller standard errors for the fixed effect in the location model, and lower bias for the random effect of the intercept in the location model. Differences between LOO and WAIC were significant only when the level-1 sample size was small, with LOO performing better when the true model had homogeneous or severe heterogeneity in residual variances.</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"678-694"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Model Selection for Mixed-Effects Location-Scale Models with Confidence Interval for LOO or WAIC Difference.\",\"authors\":\"Yue Liu, Fan Fang, Hongyun Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00273171.2025.2462033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>LOO (Leave-One-Out cross-validation) and WAIC (Widely Applicable Information Criterion) are widely used for model selection in Bayesian statistics. Most studies select the model with the smallest value based on point estimates, often without considering the differences in fit indices or the uncertainty of the estimates. To address this gap, we propose a sequential method for comparing models based on confidence intervals for <math><mi>Δ</mi><mtext>LOO</mtext></math> or <math><mi>Δ</mi><mtext>WAIC.</mtext></math> A simulation study was conducted to evaluate this method in selecting mixed-effects location-scale models (MELSMs). Our study revealed that the sequential methods, especially when using a 90% confidence interval, achieved a higher accuracy rate of model selection compared to the point method when the true model was simple, had a large magnitude of random intercept in the scale model, or had a large sample size. Models selected by the sequential methods demonstrated higher power, narrower credible interval width, smaller standard errors for the fixed effect in the location model, and lower bias for the random effect of the intercept in the location model. Differences between LOO and WAIC were significant only when the level-1 sample size was small, with LOO performing better when the true model had homogeneous or severe heterogeneity in residual variances.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"678-694\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multivariate Behavioral Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2025.2462033\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2025.2462033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在贝叶斯统计中,LOO (Leave-One-Out cross-validation)和WAIC (wide Applicable Information Criterion)被广泛用于模型选择。大多数研究选择基于点估计的最小值模型,往往不考虑拟合指标的差异或估计的不确定性。为了解决这一差距,我们提出了一种基于ΔLOO或ΔWAIC置信区间的序列方法来比较模型。仿真研究了该方法在选择混合效应位置尺度模型(MELSMs)中的应用。我们的研究表明,当真实模型简单、比例模型中随机截距较大或样本量较大时,序列方法的模型选择准确率比点法高,特别是在使用90%置信区间时。序列方法选择的模型具有更高的功率、更窄的可信区间宽度、更小的定位模型固定效应的标准误差和更小的定位模型截距随机效应的偏差。LOO和WAIC之间的差异仅在一级样本量较小时才显着,当真实模型在残差方差中具有均匀或严重异质性时,LOO表现更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Model Selection for Mixed-Effects Location-Scale Models with Confidence Interval for LOO or WAIC Difference.

LOO (Leave-One-Out cross-validation) and WAIC (Widely Applicable Information Criterion) are widely used for model selection in Bayesian statistics. Most studies select the model with the smallest value based on point estimates, often without considering the differences in fit indices or the uncertainty of the estimates. To address this gap, we propose a sequential method for comparing models based on confidence intervals for ΔLOO or ΔWAIC. A simulation study was conducted to evaluate this method in selecting mixed-effects location-scale models (MELSMs). Our study revealed that the sequential methods, especially when using a 90% confidence interval, achieved a higher accuracy rate of model selection compared to the point method when the true model was simple, had a large magnitude of random intercept in the scale model, or had a large sample size. Models selected by the sequential methods demonstrated higher power, narrower credible interval width, smaller standard errors for the fixed effect in the location model, and lower bias for the random effect of the intercept in the location model. Differences between LOO and WAIC were significant only when the level-1 sample size was small, with LOO performing better when the true model had homogeneous or severe heterogeneity in residual variances.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Multivariate Behavioral Research 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.60%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Multivariate Behavioral Research (MBR) publishes a variety of substantive, methodological, and theoretical articles in all areas of the social and behavioral sciences. Most MBR articles fall into one of two categories. Substantive articles report on applications of sophisticated multivariate research methods to study topics of substantive interest in personality, health, intelligence, industrial/organizational, and other behavioral science areas. Methodological articles present and/or evaluate new developments in multivariate methods, or address methodological issues in current research. We also encourage submission of integrative articles related to pedagogy involving multivariate research methods, and to historical treatments of interest and relevance to multivariate research methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信