1 / 22

Priors, Normal Models, Computing Posteriors

Priors, Normal Models, Computing Posteriors. st5219 : Bayesian hierarchical modelling lecture 2.1. Plan for lecture. Priors: how to choose them, different types The normal distribution in Bayesianism Tutorial 1: over to you Computing posteriors: Monte Carlo Importance Sampling

lamont
Télécharger la présentation

Priors, Normal Models, Computing Posteriors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Priors, Normal Models, Computing Posteriors st5219: Bayesian hierarchical modelling lecture 2.1

  2. Plan for lecture • Priors: how to choose them, different types • The normal distribution in Bayesianism • Tutorial 1: over to you • Computing posteriors: • Monte Carlo • Importance Sampling • Markov chain Monte Carlo

  3. What is random? Frequentism Bayesianism • Something with a long run frequency distribution • E.g. coin tosses • Patients in a clinical trial • “Measurement” errors? • Everything • What you don’t know is random • Unobserved data, parameters, unknown states, hypotheses • Observed data still arise from probability model Knock on effects on how to estimate things and assess hypotheses

  4. This week: practical issues Choosing a prior Doing computations • Very misunderstood • “How did you choose your priors?” • Please never answer “Oh, I just made them up” • For data analysis, you need strong rationale for choice of prior • (later)

  5. An example to illustrate priors • Following infection: body creates antibodies • These target pathogen and remain in the blood • Antibodies can provide data on historic disease exposure

  6. H1N1 in Singapore Cook, Chen, Lim (2010) EmergInfDisDOI:10.3201/EID.1610.100840

  7. Serology of H1N1 Singapore study longitudinal Chen et al (2010) J Am Med Assoc 303:1383--91

  8. Measurements • Observation in (xij,2xij) for individual i, observation j • Define “seroconversion” to be a “four-fold” rise in antibody levels, i.e. • yi= 1 if xi2≥ 4xi1 and 0 otherwise • Out of 727 participants with follow up, we have 98 seroconversions Q: what proportion were infected?

  9. AIDS ≠ influenza A H1N1 • Seroconversion “test” not perfect: something about 80% • Infection rate should be higher than seroconversion rate Board work

  10. Bayesian approach • Need some priors • Last time: “U(0,1) good way to represent lack of knowledge of a probability” • Before we collected the JAMA data, we didn’t know what p would be, and a prior p~U(0,1) makes sense • But there are data out there on σ!

  11. Other data Zambon et al (2001) Arch Intern Med 161:2116--22

  12. Board work Other data • m = 791 • y = 629 This can give you a prior!!! σ~Be(630,163)

  13. Kinds of priors Non-informative Informative • p~U(0,1) • σ²~U(0,∞) • μ~U(- ∞, ∞) • β~N(0,1000²) • Should give you no information about that parameter except what is in the data • σ ~Be(630,163) • μ ~N(15.2,6.8²) • Lets you supplement natural information content of the data when not enough information on that aspect • Can give information on other parameters indirectly

  14. How to choose? Scenario 1. You are trying to reach an optimal decision in the presence of uncertainty: use whatever information you can, even if subjective, via informative priors Scenario 2. You are trying to estimate parameters for a scientific data analysis (you cannot or don’t want to use external data): use non-informative prior Scenario 3. You are trying to estimate parameters for a scientific data analysis (you have good external data): use non-informative priors for those bits you have no data for or in which you want your own data to speak for themselves; use informative priors elsewhere

  15. Whence came that Be(630,163)? Step 1: uniform prior for σ Step 2: fit model to Zambon data Step 3: posterior for that becomes prior for main analysis Board work

  16. Conjugacy • The beta distribution is conjugate to a binomial model, in that if you start with a beta prior and use it in a binomial model for p and x, you end with a beta posterior of known form • I.e. if p~Be(a,b) and x~Bin(n,p), p|x~Be(a+x,b+n-x) • Other conjugate priors exist forsimple models, e.g. ... Board work

  17. Why is it ok to take posteriors and turn them into priors? • It’s the incremental nature of accumulated knowledge • EgZambon study:

  18. Effective sample sizes • You can think of the parameters of the beta(a,b) as representing • a best guess of the proportion, a/(a+b) • a “sample size” that the prior is equivalent to (a+b) • This is an easy way to transform published results into beta priors: take the point estimate (MLE, say) and the sample size and transform to get a and b. • (So a uniform prior is like adding one positive and one negative value to your data set: is this fair???)

  19. Other converting methods • Take a point estimate and CI and convert to 2 parameters to represent your prior. • Eg the infectious period is a popular parameter in infectious disease epidemiology: the average time from infection to recovery • For no good reason, often assumed to be exponential with mean λ, say • Fraser et al (2009) Science324:1557--61 suggest estimate ofgeneration period of 1.91 with95%CI (1.3,2.71) Board work

  20. Two final thoughts on priors • I mentioned U(-∞, ∞) as a non-informative prior.What’s the density function for U(- ∞, ∞)? Board work

  21. Two final thoughts on priors • A prior such as U(-∞, ∞) is called an improper prior as it does not have a proper density function. • Improper priors sometimes give proper posteriors: depending on the integral of the likelihood. • Not an improper prior is a proper one

  22. Two final thoughts on priors • Just because a prior is flat in one representation does not mean it is flat in another • Eg for an exponential model (for survival analysis say) Board work

More Related