For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
75
views
17
references
 Top references
cited by
885
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      2,422
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC

      Author(s): , ,
      Publication date (Print):
      Journal: Statistics and Computing
      Publisher: Springer Nature

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Bayesian Theory

          Jos M. Bernardo, Adrian Smith (1994)
          Book 0 comments Cited 346 times – based on 0 reviews
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection

            Alain Celisse, Sylvain Arlot (2009)
            Used to estimate the risk of an estimator or to perform model selection, cross-validation is a widespread strategy because of its simplicity and its apparent universality. Many results exist on the model selection performances of cross-validation procedures. This survey intends to relate these results to the most recent advances of model selection theory, with a particular emphasis on distinguishing empirical statements from rigorous theoretical results. As a conclusion, guidelines are provided for choosing the best cross-validation procedure according to the particular features of the problem in hand.
            Article 0 comments Cited 235 times – based on 0 reviews
            Preprint
                 Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Penalized loss functions for Bayesian model comparison.

              Martyn Plummer (2008)
              The deviance information criterion (DIC) is widely used for Bayesian model comparison, despite the lack of a clear theoretical foundation. DIC is shown to be an approximation to a penalized loss function based on the deviance, with a penalty derived from a cross-validation argument. This approximation is valid only when the effective number of parameters in the model is much smaller than the number of independent observations. In disease mapping, a typical application of DIC, this assumption does not hold and DIC under-penalizes more complex models. Another deviance-based loss function, derived from the same decision-theoretic framework, is applied to mixture models, which have previously been considered an unsuitable application for DIC.
              Article 0 comments Cited 115 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Title: Statistics and Computing
                Abbreviated Title: Stat Comput
                Publisher: Springer Nature
                ISSN (Print): 0960-3174
                ISSN (Electronic): 1573-1375
                Publication date Created: September 2017
                Publication date (Print): August 2016
                Volume: 27
                Issue: 5
                Pages: 1413-1432
                Article
                DOI: 10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4
                SO-VID: ace2e465-78d1-4bef-8c76-5b10c7ce66e5
                Copyright © © 2017
                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content2,422

                See all similar

                Cited by1,067

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors282

                See all reference authors