This function performs holdout validation on an object of class
pmc, given both a modeled and validation
This is an object of class
This is a model specification function for
This is a list that contains two lists of data, as
There are numerous ways to validate a model. In this context,
validation means to assess the predictive performance of a model on
out-of-sample data. If reasonable, leave-one-out cross-validation
(LOOCV) via the conditional predictive ordinate (CPO) should be
considered when using
PMC. For more information on CPO, see the accompanying
vignettes entitled "Bayesian Inference" and "Examples". CPO is
unavailable when using
VariationalBayes, it is recommended that the user
perform holdout validation by comparing posterior predictive checks,
comparing the differences in the specified discrepancy measure.
When LOOCV is unreasonable, popular alternatives include k-fold
cross-validation and holdout validation. Although k-fold
cross-validation is not performed explicitly here, the user may
accomplish it with some effort. Of these methods, holdout validation
includes the most bias, but is the most common in applied use, since
only one model is fitted, rather than k-1 models in k-fold
Validate function performs holdout
For holdout validation, the observed data is sampled randomly into two
data sets of approximately equal size, or three data sets that
consists of two data sets of approximately equal size and a remainder
data set. Of the two data sets approximately equal in size, one is
called the modeled (or training) data set, and the other is called the
validation (or test) data set. The modeled data set is used when
updating the model. After the model is updated, both data sets are
predicted in the
Validate function, given the model. Predictive
loss is estimated for the validation data set, relative to the modeled
Predictive loss is associated with overfitting, differences between the model and validation data set, or model misspecification. Bayesian inference is reputed to be much more robust to overfitting than frequentist inference.
There are many ways to measure predictive loss, and within each approach, there are usually numerous possible loss functions. The log-likelihood of the model is a popular approximate utility function, and consequently, the deviance of the model is a popular loss function.
A vector of model-level (rather than record-level) deviance
samples is returned with each object of class
Validate function obtains this vector for each
data set, and then calculates the Bayesian Predictive Information
Criterion (BPIC), as per Ando (2007). BPIC is a variation of the
Deviance Information Criterion (DIC) that has been modified for
predictive distributions. For more information on DIC (Spiegelhalter
et al., 2002), see the accompanying vignette entitled "Bayesian
Inference". The goal is to minimize BPIC.
When DIC is applied after the model, such as with a predictive distribution, it is positively biased, or too small. The bias is due to the same data y being used both to construct the posterior distributions and to evaluate pD, the penalty term for model complexity. For example, for validation data set ynew, BPIC is:
BPIC = -2log[p(ynew|y,Theta)] + 2pD
plot=TRUE, the distributions of the modeled and validation
deviances are plotted above, and the lower plot is the modeled
deviance subtracted from the validation deviance. When positive, this
distribution of the change in deviance is the loss in predictive
deviance associated with moving from the modeled data set to the
validation data set.
After using the
Validate function, the user is encouraged to
perform posterior predictive checks on each data set via the
This function returns a list with three components. The first two
components are also lists. Each list consists of
Deviance. The third component is a matrix that
reports the expected deviance, pD, and BPIC. The object is of class
when associated with
Statisticat, LLC. [email protected]
Ando, T. (2007). "Bayesian Predictive Information Criterion for the Evaluation of Hierarchical Bayesian and Empirical Bayes Models". Biometrika, 94(2), p. 443–458.
Spiegelhalter, D.J., Best, N.G., Carlin, B.P., and van der Linde, A. (2002). "Bayesian Measures of Model Complexity and Fit (with Discussion)". Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B 64, p. 583–639.
1 2 3 4
Add the following code to your website.
For more information on customizing the embed code, read Embedding Snippets.