Local Model Influence
模型的局部影响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敏感性,所给例子不足以对应任何指定的经济计量细分方向。
模型的局部影响AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
This article develops a general method for assessing the influence of model assumptions in a Bayesian analysis. We assume that model choices are indexed by a hyperparameter with some given initial choice. We use the term “model” to encompass both the sampling model and the prior distribution. We wish to assess the effect of changing the hyperparameter away from the initial choice. We are performing a sensitivity analysis, with the hyperparameter defining our perturbations. We use the Kullback—Leibler divergence to measure the difference between posteriors corresponding to different choices of the hyperparameter. We also measure the change in priors. If small changes in the priors lead to large changes in posteriors, the choice of hyperparameter is influential. The second-order difference in the Kullback—Leibler divergence is expressed by Fisher information matrices. The relative change in posteriors compared with priors may be summarized by the relative eigenvalue of the posterior and prior Fisher information matrices. The corresponding eigenvector indicates which aspects of the perturbation hyperparameter are most influential. Examples considered are the choice of conjugate prior in regression, case weights in regression, and the choice of Dirichlet prior for multinomials.