Approaches for Empirical Bayes Confidence Intervals
经验贝叶斯置信区间的构造方法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:摘要聚焦通用经验贝叶斯区间理论与模拟,未明确涉及所列经济或金融模型,不能仅凭推断方法进行领域归类。
经验贝叶斯置信区间的构造方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Parametric empirical Bayes (EB) methods of point estimation date to the landmark paper by James and Stein (1961). Interval estimation through parametric empirical Bayes techniques has a somewhat shorter history, which was summarized by Laird and Louis (1987). In the exchangeable case, one obtains a “naive” EB confidence interval by simply taking appropriate percentiles of the estimated posterior distribution of the parameter, where the estimation of the prior parameters (“hyperparameters”) is accomplished through the marginal distribution of the data. Unfortunately, these “naive” intervals tend to be too short, since they fail to account for the variability in the estimation of the hyperparameters. That is, they do not attain the desired coverage probability in the EB sense defined by Morris (1983a, b). They also provide no statement of conditional calibration (Rubin 1984). In this article we propose a conditional bias correction method for developing EM intervals that corrects these deficiencies in the naive intervals. As an alternative, several authors have suggested use of the marginal posterior in this regard. We attempt to clarify its role in achieving EB coverage. Results of extensive simulation of coverage probability and interval length for these approaches are presented in the context of several illustrative examples.