Paper detail

Power-Expected-Posterior Priors for Variable Selection in Gaussian Linear Models

In the context of the expected-posterior prior (EPP) approach to Bayesian variable selection in linear models, we combine ideas from power-prior and unit-information-prior methodologies to simultaneously produce a minimally-informative prior and diminish the effect of training samples. The result is that in practice our power-expected-posterior (PEP) methodology is sufficiently insensitive to the size n* of the training sample, due to PEP's unit-information construction, that one may take n* equal to the full-data sample size n and dispense with training samples altogether. In this paper we focus on Gaussian linear models and develop our method under two different baseline prior choices: the independence Jeffreys (or reference) prior, yielding the J-PEP posterior, and the Zellner g-prior, leading to Z-PEP. We find that, under the reference baseline prior, the asymptotics of PEP Bayes factors are equivalent to those of Schwartz's BIC criterion, ensuring consistency of the PEP approach to model selection. We compare the performance of our method, in simulation studies and a real example involving prediction of air-pollutant concentrations from meteorological covariates, with that of a variety of previously-defined variants on Bayes factors for objective variable selection. Our prior, due to its unit-information structure, leads to a variable-selection procedure that (1) is systematically more parsimonious than the basic EPP with minimal training sample, while sacrificing no desirable performance characteristics to achieve this parsimony; (2) is robust to the size of the training sample, thus enjoying the advantages described above arising from the avoidance of training samples altogether; and (3) identifies maximum-a-posteriori models that achieve good out-of-sample predictive performance.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.