Paper detail

Bayes and empirical Bayes: do they merge?

Bayesian inference is attractive for its coherence and good frequentist properties. However, it is a common experience that eliciting a honest prior may be difficult and, in practice, people often take an {\em empirical Bayes} approach, plugging empirical estimates of the prior hyperparameters into the posterior distribution. Even if not rigorously justified, the underlying idea is that, when the sample size is large, empirical Bayes leads to "similar" inferential answers. Yet, precise mathematical results seem to be missing. In this work, we give a more rigorous justification in terms of merging of Bayes and empirical Bayes posterior distributions. We consider two notions of merging: Bayesian weak merging and frequentist merging in total variation. Since weak merging is related to consistency, we provide sufficient conditions for consistency of empirical Bayes posteriors. Also, we show that, under regularity conditions, the empirical Bayes procedure asymptotically selects the value of the hyperparameter for which the prior mostly favors the "truth". Examples include empirical Bayes density estimation with Dirichlet process mixtures.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.