1996
DOI: 10.1007/bf02562621
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical inference and Monte Carlo algorithms

Abstract: This review article looks at a small part of the picture of the interrelationship between statistical theory and computational algorithms, especially the Gibbs sampler and the Accept-Reject algorithm. We pay particular attention to how the methodologies affect and complement each other.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…New realizations are kept or discarded according to the Metropolis criterion in a Markov chain. This results in a sample of DEM(T) solutions that is representative of the actual probability distribution of the DEM(T) (see, e.g., Smith & Roberts 1993;Casella 1996). MCMC methods are described in detail in the astronomical literature by Kashyap & Drake (1998), van Dyk et al (2001, von Hippel et al (2006), and others.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New realizations are kept or discarded according to the Metropolis criterion in a Markov chain. This results in a sample of DEM(T) solutions that is representative of the actual probability distribution of the DEM(T) (see, e.g., Smith & Roberts 1993;Casella 1996). MCMC methods are described in detail in the astronomical literature by Kashyap & Drake (1998), van Dyk et al (2001, von Hippel et al (2006), and others.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas the approach of Bartolucci & Besag applies, in theory, to any probability model, it presupposes that the full conditionals are compatible with a valid joint distribution. For conditionals that are not derived from a known, though possibly unnormalised, joint distribution, compatibility must be checked; see for example Casella (1996) and Arnold et al (2001 (1996). Kaiser & Cressie (2000) consider the question of defining Markov random fields with arbitrary conditionals, and give necessary and sufficient conditions which such conditionals must fulfil.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notice that in both MM PF and MKF the updated state estimates and posterior mode probabilities are calculated before the resampling step, because resampling brings extra variation to the current samples ( [30], [26], pp. 103).…”
Section: The Mixture Kalman Filter Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%