Holdout predictive checks for Bayesian model criticism
用于贝叶斯模型诊断的留出预测检验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:摘要讨论通用贝叶斯模型诊断,未明确宏观、金融或微观计量的专门研究对象。
用于贝叶斯模型诊断的留出预测检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Abstract Bayesian modelling helps applied researchers to articulate assumptions about their data and develop models tailored for specific applications. Thanks to good methods for approximate posterior inference, researchers can now easily build, use, and revise complicated Bayesian models for large and rich data. These capabilities, however, bring into focus the problem of model criticism. Researchers need tools to diagnose the fitness of their models, to understand where they fall short, and to guide their revision. In this paper, we develop a new method for Bayesian model criticism, the holdout predictive check (HPC). Holdout predictive check are built on posterior predictive check (PPC), a seminal method that checks a model by assessing the posterior predictive distribution on the observed data. However, PPC use the data twice—both to calculate the posterior predictive and to evaluate it—which can lead to uncalibrated p-values. Holdout predictive check, in contrast, compare the posterior predictive distribution to a draw from the population distribution, a heldout dataset. This method blends Bayesian modelling with frequentist assessment. Unlike the PPC, we prove that the HPC is properly calibrated. Empirically, we study HPC on classical regression, a hierarchical model of text data, and factor analysis.