表示遗憾:对可信时间间隔的统一看法。

IF 1.8 4区 数学 Q1 STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
Kenneth Rice, Lingbo Ye
{"title":"表示遗憾:对可信时间间隔的统一看法。","authors":"Kenneth Rice,&nbsp;Lingbo Ye","doi":"10.1080/00031305.2022.2039764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Posterior uncertainty is typically summarized as a credible interval, an interval in the parameter space that contains a fixed proportion - usually 95% - of the posterior's support. For multivariate parameters, credible sets perform the same role. There are of course many potential 95% intervals from which to choose, yet even standard choices are rarely justified in any formal way. In this paper we give a general method, focusing on the loss function that motivates an estimate - the Bayes rule - around which we construct a credible set. The set contains all points which, as estimates, would have minimally-worse expected loss than the Bayes rule: we call this excess expected loss 'regret'. The approach can be used for any model and prior, and we show how it justifies all widely-used choices of credible interval/set. Further examples show how it provides insights into more complex estimation problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":50801,"journal":{"name":"American Statistician","volume":"76 3","pages":"248-256"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9401190/pdf/nihms-1798412.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expressing regret: a unified view of credible intervals.\",\"authors\":\"Kenneth Rice,&nbsp;Lingbo Ye\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00031305.2022.2039764\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Posterior uncertainty is typically summarized as a credible interval, an interval in the parameter space that contains a fixed proportion - usually 95% - of the posterior's support. For multivariate parameters, credible sets perform the same role. There are of course many potential 95% intervals from which to choose, yet even standard choices are rarely justified in any formal way. In this paper we give a general method, focusing on the loss function that motivates an estimate - the Bayes rule - around which we construct a credible set. The set contains all points which, as estimates, would have minimally-worse expected loss than the Bayes rule: we call this excess expected loss 'regret'. The approach can be used for any model and prior, and we show how it justifies all widely-used choices of credible interval/set. Further examples show how it provides insights into more complex estimation problems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Statistician\",\"volume\":\"76 3\",\"pages\":\"248-256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9401190/pdf/nihms-1798412.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Statistician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2022.2039764\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Statistician","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2022.2039764","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

后验不确定性通常概括为可信区间,即参数空间中包含固定比例(通常为95%)的后验支持度的区间。对于多变量参数,可信集扮演同样的角色。当然,有许多潜在的95%区间可供选择,但即使是标准的选择也很少以任何正式的方式证明。在本文中,我们给出了一种通用的方法,重点是激励估计的损失函数-贝叶斯规则-我们围绕它构造一个可信集。这个集合包含了所有的点,作为估计,这些点的预期损失比贝叶斯规则要小:我们把这个超额的预期损失称为“后悔”。该方法可用于任何模型和先验,我们展示了它如何证明所有广泛使用的可信区间/集的选择。进一步的示例显示了它如何提供对更复杂的估计问题的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Expressing regret: a unified view of credible intervals.

Expressing regret: a unified view of credible intervals.

Posterior uncertainty is typically summarized as a credible interval, an interval in the parameter space that contains a fixed proportion - usually 95% - of the posterior's support. For multivariate parameters, credible sets perform the same role. There are of course many potential 95% intervals from which to choose, yet even standard choices are rarely justified in any formal way. In this paper we give a general method, focusing on the loss function that motivates an estimate - the Bayes rule - around which we construct a credible set. The set contains all points which, as estimates, would have minimally-worse expected loss than the Bayes rule: we call this excess expected loss 'regret'. The approach can be used for any model and prior, and we show how it justifies all widely-used choices of credible interval/set. Further examples show how it provides insights into more complex estimation problems.

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
American Statistician
American Statistician 数学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Are you looking for general-interest articles about current national and international statistical problems and programs; interesting and fun articles of a general nature about statistics and its applications; or the teaching of statistics? Then you are looking for The American Statistician (TAS), published quarterly by the American Statistical Association. TAS contains timely articles organized into the following sections: Statistical Practice, General, Teacher''s Corner, History Corner, Interdisciplinary, Statistical Computing and Graphics, Reviews of Books and Teaching Materials, and Letters to the Editor.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信