2014
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1403.4630
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Penalising model component complexity: A principled, practical approach to constructing priors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, a single hyperparameter value cannot be used in all situations. Some recent studies have focused on methods for more careful and principled specification of priors for complex hierarchical models (Fong et al, 2010;Simpson et al, 2014;Sørbye and Rue, 2014). The method of Sørbye and Rue (2014) was developed for intrinsic GMRF priors and we adapt their approach to our specific models in what follows.…”
Section: Parameterizing the Global Smoothing Priormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, a single hyperparameter value cannot be used in all situations. Some recent studies have focused on methods for more careful and principled specification of priors for complex hierarchical models (Fong et al, 2010;Simpson et al, 2014;Sørbye and Rue, 2014). The method of Sørbye and Rue (2014) was developed for intrinsic GMRF priors and we adapt their approach to our specific models in what follows.…”
Section: Parameterizing the Global Smoothing Priormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is an efficient computational alternative to the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods, especially when data has a spatial or space-temporal structure 26 . In the modeling, minimally informative priors were considered for fixed effects and priors with penalized complexity for random effects 32 . The analyses were performed in the R-INLA 31 and INLAOutputs 33 packages of the R program 34 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With too restrictive a training set, fits would suffer from additional systematic bias. As such, our SFH template parameters are intended to have weakly informative priors (Simpson et al 2014;Gelman & Hennig 2015) which encompass the areas of parameter space that are physically allowable and in line with previous studies (to this point, see the below description of the mass weighted mean stellar age distribution, Figure 6), while allowing only a relatively small proportion of more complex models (e.g., those involving bursts or a transition in SFH behavior).…”
Section: Sfhs and Stellar Population Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%