Cargando…

On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective

Issues of model selection have dominated the theoretical and applied statistical literature for decades. Model selection methods such as ridge regression, the lasso, and the elastic net have replaced ad hoc methods such as stepwise regression as a means of model selection. In the end, however, these...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Kaplan, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7958145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33721184
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11336-021-09754-5
_version_ 1783664783148449792
author Kaplan, David
author_facet Kaplan, David
author_sort Kaplan, David
collection PubMed
description Issues of model selection have dominated the theoretical and applied statistical literature for decades. Model selection methods such as ridge regression, the lasso, and the elastic net have replaced ad hoc methods such as stepwise regression as a means of model selection. In the end, however, these methods lead to a single final model that is often taken to be the model considered ahead of time, thus ignoring the uncertainty inherent in the search for a final model. One method that has enjoyed a long history of theoretical developments and substantive applications, and that accounts directly for uncertainty in model selection, is Bayesian model averaging (BMA). BMA addresses the problem of model selection by not selecting a final model, but rather by averaging over a space of possible models that could have generated the data. The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed and up-to-date review of BMA with a focus on its foundations in Bayesian decision theory and Bayesian predictive modeling. We consider the selection of parameter and model priors as well as methods for evaluating predictions based on BMA. We also consider important assumptions regarding BMA and extensions of model averaging methods to address these assumptions, particularly the method of Bayesian stacking. Simple empirical examples are provided and directions for future research relevant to psychometrics are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7958145
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79581452021-03-15 On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective Kaplan, David Psychometrika Application Reviews and Case Studies Issues of model selection have dominated the theoretical and applied statistical literature for decades. Model selection methods such as ridge regression, the lasso, and the elastic net have replaced ad hoc methods such as stepwise regression as a means of model selection. In the end, however, these methods lead to a single final model that is often taken to be the model considered ahead of time, thus ignoring the uncertainty inherent in the search for a final model. One method that has enjoyed a long history of theoretical developments and substantive applications, and that accounts directly for uncertainty in model selection, is Bayesian model averaging (BMA). BMA addresses the problem of model selection by not selecting a final model, but rather by averaging over a space of possible models that could have generated the data. The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed and up-to-date review of BMA with a focus on its foundations in Bayesian decision theory and Bayesian predictive modeling. We consider the selection of parameter and model priors as well as methods for evaluating predictions based on BMA. We also consider important assumptions regarding BMA and extensions of model averaging methods to address these assumptions, particularly the method of Bayesian stacking. Simple empirical examples are provided and directions for future research relevant to psychometrics are discussed. Springer US 2021-03-15 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7958145/ /pubmed/33721184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11336-021-09754-5 Text en © The Psychometric Society 2021 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Application Reviews and Case Studies
Kaplan, David
On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title_full On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title_fullStr On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title_full_unstemmed On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title_short On the Quantification of Model Uncertainty: A Bayesian Perspective
title_sort on the quantification of model uncertainty: a bayesian perspective
topic Application Reviews and Case Studies
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7958145/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33721184
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11336-021-09754-5
work_keys_str_mv AT kaplandavid onthequantificationofmodeluncertaintyabayesianperspective