BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Bradley Efron

Bradley Efron appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
MethodologyApplicationsComputationMachine Learning

Catalog footprint

What is connected

5works
4topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2014arXiv

Confidence Intervals for Random Forests: The Jackknife and the Infinitesimal Jackknife

We study the variability of predictions made by bagged learners and random forests, and show how to estimate standard errors for these methods. Our work builds on variance estimates for bagging proposed by Efron (1992, 2012) that are based on the jackknife and the infinitesimal jackknife (IJ). In practice, bagged predictors are computed using a finite number B of bootstrap replicates, and working with a large B can be computationally expensive. Direct applications of jackknife and IJ estimators to bagging require B on the order of n^{1.5} bootstrap replicates to converge, where n is the size of the training set. We propose improved versions that only require B on the order of n replicates. Moreover, we show that the IJ estimator requires 1.7 times less bootstrap replicates than the jackknife to achieve a given accuracy. Finally, we study the sampling distributions of the jackknife and IJ variance estimates themselves. We illustrate our findings with multiple experiments and simulation studies.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Two Modeling Strategies for Empirical Bayes Estimation

Empirical Bayes methods use the data from parallel experiments, for instance, observations $X_k\sim\mathcal{N}(Θ_k,1)$ for $k=1,2,\ldots,N$, to estimate the conditional distributions $Θ_k|X_k$. There are two main estimation strategies: modeling on the $θ$ space, called "$g$-modeling" here, and modeling on the $x$ space, called "$f$-modeling." The two approaches are described and compared. A series of computational formulas are developed to assess their frequentist accuracy. Several examples, both contrived and genuine, show the strengths and limitations of the two strategies.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Bayesian inference and the parametric bootstrap

The parametric bootstrap can be used for the efficient computation of Bayes posterior distributions. Importance sampling formulas take on an easy form relating to the deviance in exponential families and are particularly simple starting from Jeffreys invariant prior. Because of the i.i.d. nature of bootstrap sampling, familiar formulas describe the computational accuracy of the Bayes estimates. Besides computational methods, the theory provides a connection between Bayesian and frequentist analysis. Efficient algorithms for the frequentist accuracy of Bayesian inferences are developed and demonstrated in a model selection example.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

The Future of Indirect Evidence

Familiar statistical tests and estimates are obtained by the direct observation of cases of interest: a clinical trial of a new drug, for instance, will compare the drug's effects on a relevant set of patients and controls. Sometimes, though, indirect evidence may be temptingly available, perhaps the results of previous trials on closely related drugs. Very roughly speaking, the difference between direct and indirect statistical evidence marks the boundary between frequentist and Bayesian thinking. Twentieth-century statistical practice focused heavily on direct evidence, on the grounds of superior objectivity. Now, however, new scientific devices such as microarrays routinely produce enormous data sets involving thousands of related situations, where indirect evidence seems too important to ignore. Empirical Bayes methodology offers an attractive direct/indirect compromise. There is already some evidence of a shift toward a less rigid standard of statistical objectivity that allows better use of indirect evidence. This article is basically the text of a recent talk featuring some examples from current practice, with a little bit of futuristic speculation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access