Posterior Risk of Modular and Semi-Modular Bayesian Inference
模块化与半模块化贝叶斯推断的后验风险AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要属于通用贝叶斯模块化推断理论,没有所列微观、宏观或金融方向的直接文本依据。
模块化与半模块化贝叶斯推断的后验风险AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Modular Bayesian methods perform inference in models that are specified through a collection of coupled sub-models, known as modules. These modules often arise from modeling different data sources or from combining domain knowledge from different disciplines. “Cutting feedback” is a Bayesian inference method that ensures misspecification of one module does not affect inferences for parameters in other modules, and produces what is known as the cut posterior. However, choosing between the cut posterior and the standard Bayesian posterior is challenging. When misspecification is not severe, cutting feedback can greatly increase posterior uncertainty without a large reduction of estimation bias, leading to a bias-variance tradeoff. This tradeoff motivates semi-modular posteriors, which interpolate between standard and cut posteriors based on a tuning parameter. In this work, we provide the first precise formulation of the bias-variance tradeoff that is present in cutting feedback, and we propose a new semi-modular posterior that takes advantage of it. Under general regularity conditions, we prove that this semi-modular posterior is more accurate than the cut posterior according to a notion of posterior risk. An important implication of this result is that point inferences made under the cut posterior are inadmissable. The new method is demonstrated in a number of examples. Supplementary materials for this article are available online, including a standardized description of the materials available for reproducing the work.