{"title":"回归中对冲突先验信息的鲁棒性","authors":"Philippe Gagnon","doi":"10.1214/22-BA1330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Including prior information about model parameters is a fundamental step of any Bayesian statistical analysis. It is viewed positively by some as it allows, among others, to quantitatively incorporate expert opinion about model parameters. It is viewed negatively by others because it sets the stage for subjectivity in statistical analysis. Certainly, it creates problems when the inference is skewed due to a conflict with the data collected. According to the theory of conflict resolution (O'Hagan and Pericchi, 2012), a solution to such problems is to diminish the impact of conflicting prior information, yielding inference consistent with the data. This is typically achieved by using heavy-tailed priors. We study both theoretically and numerically the efficacy of such a solution in a regression framework where the prior information about the coefficients takes the form of a product of density functions with known location and scale parameters. We study functions with regularly varying tails (Student distributions), log-regularly-varying tails (as introduced in Desgagn\\'e (2015)), and propose functions with slower tail decays that allow to resolve any conflict that can happen under that regression framework, contrarily to the two previous types of functions. The code to reproduce all numerical experiments is available online.","PeriodicalId":55398,"journal":{"name":"Bayesian Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Robustness Against Conflicting Prior Information in Regression\",\"authors\":\"Philippe Gagnon\",\"doi\":\"10.1214/22-BA1330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Including prior information about model parameters is a fundamental step of any Bayesian statistical analysis. It is viewed positively by some as it allows, among others, to quantitatively incorporate expert opinion about model parameters. It is viewed negatively by others because it sets the stage for subjectivity in statistical analysis. Certainly, it creates problems when the inference is skewed due to a conflict with the data collected. According to the theory of conflict resolution (O'Hagan and Pericchi, 2012), a solution to such problems is to diminish the impact of conflicting prior information, yielding inference consistent with the data. This is typically achieved by using heavy-tailed priors. We study both theoretically and numerically the efficacy of such a solution in a regression framework where the prior information about the coefficients takes the form of a product of density functions with known location and scale parameters. We study functions with regularly varying tails (Student distributions), log-regularly-varying tails (as introduced in Desgagn\\\\'e (2015)), and propose functions with slower tail decays that allow to resolve any conflict that can happen under that regression framework, contrarily to the two previous types of functions. The code to reproduce all numerical experiments is available online.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bayesian Analysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bayesian Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1214/22-BA1330\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bayesian Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1214/22-BA1330","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Robustness Against Conflicting Prior Information in Regression
Including prior information about model parameters is a fundamental step of any Bayesian statistical analysis. It is viewed positively by some as it allows, among others, to quantitatively incorporate expert opinion about model parameters. It is viewed negatively by others because it sets the stage for subjectivity in statistical analysis. Certainly, it creates problems when the inference is skewed due to a conflict with the data collected. According to the theory of conflict resolution (O'Hagan and Pericchi, 2012), a solution to such problems is to diminish the impact of conflicting prior information, yielding inference consistent with the data. This is typically achieved by using heavy-tailed priors. We study both theoretically and numerically the efficacy of such a solution in a regression framework where the prior information about the coefficients takes the form of a product of density functions with known location and scale parameters. We study functions with regularly varying tails (Student distributions), log-regularly-varying tails (as introduced in Desgagn\'e (2015)), and propose functions with slower tail decays that allow to resolve any conflict that can happen under that regression framework, contrarily to the two previous types of functions. The code to reproduce all numerical experiments is available online.
期刊介绍:
Bayesian Analysis is an electronic journal of the International Society for Bayesian Analysis. It seeks to publish a wide range of articles that demonstrate or discuss Bayesian methods in some theoretical or applied context. The journal welcomes submissions involving presentation of new computational and statistical methods; critical reviews and discussions of existing approaches; historical perspectives; description of important scientific or policy application areas; case studies; and methods for experimental design, data collection, data sharing, or data mining.
Evaluation of submissions is based on importance of content and effectiveness of communication. Discussion papers are typically chosen by the Editor in Chief, or suggested by an Editor, among the regular submissions. In addition, the Journal encourages individual authors to submit manuscripts for consideration as discussion papers.