Posterior and cross-validatory predictive checks: A comparison of MCMC and INLA

147Citations
Citations of this article
119Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Model criticism and comparison of Bayesian hierarchical models is often based on posterior or leave-one-out cross-validatory predictive checks. Cross-validatory checks are usually preferred because posterior predictive checks are difficult to assess and tend to be too conservative. However, techniques for statistical inference in such models often try to avoid full (manual) leave-one-out cross-validation, since it is very time-consuming. In this paper we will compare two approaches for estimating Bayesian hierarchical models: Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) and integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA). We review how both approaches allow for the computation of leave-one-out cross-validatory checks without re-running the model for each observation in turn. We then empirically compare the two approaches in an extensive case study analysing the spatial distribution of bovine viral diarrhoe (BVD) among cows in Switzerland. © 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Held, L., Schrödle, B., & Rue, H. (2010). Posterior and cross-validatory predictive checks: A comparison of MCMC and INLA. In Statistical Modelling and Regression Structures: Festschrift in Honour of Ludwig Fahrmeir (pp. 91–110). Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2413-1_6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free