BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Monica Musio contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
We discuss an approach for fitting robust nonlinear regression models, which can be employed to model and predict the contagion dynamics of the Covid-19 in Italy. The focus is on the analysis of epidemic data using robust dose-response curves, but the functionality is applicable to arbitrary nonlinear regression models.
We consider the problem of choosing between parametric models for a discrete observable, taking a Bayesian approach in which the within-model prior distributions are allowed to be improper. In order to avoid the ambiguity in the marginal likelihood function in such a case, we apply a homogeneous scoring rule. For the particular case of distinguishing between Poisson and Negative Binomial models, we conduct simulations that indicate that, applied prequentially, the method will consistently select the true model.
Many legal cases require decisions about causality, responsibility or blame, and these may be based on statistical data. However, causal inferences from such data are beset by subtle conceptual and practical difficulties, and in general it is, at best, possible to identify the "probability of causation" as lying between certain empirically informed limits. These limits can be refined and improved if we can obtain additional information, from statistical or scientific data, relating to the internal workings of the causal processes. In this paper we review and extend recent work in this area, where additional information may be available on covariate and/or mediating variables.
Bayesian model selection with improper priors is not well-defined because of the dependence of the marginal likelihood on the arbitrary scaling constants of the within-model prior densities. We show how this problem can be evaded by replacing marginal log-likelihood by a homogeneous proper scoring rule, which is insensitive to the scaling constants. Suitably applied, this will typically enable consistent selection of the true model.
While statisticians and quantitative social scientists typically study the "effects of causes" (EoC), Lawyers and the Courts are more concerned with understanding the "causes of effects" (CoE). EoC can be addressed using experimental design and statistical analysis, but it is less clear how to incorporate statistical or epidemiological evidence into CoE reasoning, as might be required for a case at Law. Some form of counterfactual reasoning, such as the "potential outcomes" approach championed by Rubin, appears unavoidable, but this typically yields "answers" that are sensitive to arbitrary and untestable assumptions. We must therefore recognise that a CoE question simply might not have a well-determined answer. It is nevertheless possible to use statistical data to set bounds within which any answer must lie. With less than perfect data these bounds will themselves be uncertain, leading to a compounding of different kinds of uncertainty. Still further care is required in the presence of possible confounding factors. In addition, even identifying the relevant "counterfactual contrast" may be a matter of Policy as much as of Science. Defining the question is as non-trivial a task as finding a route towards an answer. This paper develops some technical elaborations of these philosophical points, and illustrates them with an analysis of a case study in child protection. Keywords: benfluorex, causes of effects, counterfactual, child protection, effects of causes, Fre'chet bound, potential outcome, probability of causation
Proper scoring rules are methods for encouraging honest assessment of probability distributions. Just like likelihood, a proper scoring rule can be applied to supply an unbiased estimating equation for any statistical model, and the theory of such equations can be applied to understand the properties of the associated estimator. In this paper we develop some basic scoring rule estimation theory, and explore robustness and interval estimation properties by means of theory and simulations.
We give an overview of some uses of proper scoring rules in statistical inference, including frequentist estimation theory and Bayesian model selection with improper priors.
In recent years, spatial and spatio-temporal modeling have become an important area of research in many fields (epidemiology, environmental studies, disease mapping). In this work we propose different spatial models to study hospital recruitment, including some potentially explicative variables. Interest is on the distribution per geographical unit of the ratio between the number of patients living in this geographical unit and the population in the same unit. Models considered are within the framework of Bayesian Latent Gaussian models. Our response variable is assumed to follow a binomial distribution, with logit link, whose parameters are the population in the geographical unit and the corresponding relative risk. The structured additive predictor accounts for effects of various covariates in an additive way, including smoothing functions of the covariates (for example spatial effect), linear effect of covariates. To approximate posterior marginals, which not available in closed form, we use integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA), recently proposed for approximate Bayesian inference in latent Gaussian models. INLA has the advantage of giving very accurate approximations and being faster than McMC methods when the number of parameters does not exceed 6 (as it is in our case). Model comparisons are assessed using DIC criterion.