Bayesian Data Analysis in Ecology Using Linear Models With R, BUGS, and STAN 2015
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-801370-0.00003-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Bayesian and the Frequentist Ways of Analyzing Data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This highlights an advantage of the Bayesian approach�straightforward error propagation for quantities derived from the posterior distribution of the model parameters. 52 The three dosing protocols yielded distinct lead release distributions over most of the study, and the difference between the lowest orthophosphate dose and the other two is particularly apparent (Figure 7). The ratio of dissolved Pb concentrations at a P ratio of 0:1�comparing the 0 mg P L −1 control with the 1 mg P L −1 dose�peaked at 31.3 with a 95% credible interval of 27.3−35.5 (Figure 7a).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…This highlights an advantage of the Bayesian approach�straightforward error propagation for quantities derived from the posterior distribution of the model parameters. 52 The three dosing protocols yielded distinct lead release distributions over most of the study, and the difference between the lowest orthophosphate dose and the other two is particularly apparent (Figure 7). The ratio of dissolved Pb concentrations at a P ratio of 0:1�comparing the 0 mg P L −1 control with the 1 mg P L −1 dose�peaked at 31.3 with a 95% credible interval of 27.3−35.5 (Figure 7a).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Coherence between model predictions and observed responses was indicated by a histogram with a shape reasonably close to a uniform distribution [52]. Models were also judged by inspecting maps and empirical variograms of model residuals [53], where residuals were computed as the means from posterior predictive distributions minus observed values [54] and pairwise distances were estimated from the geographic coordinates of county centroids.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We initially fitted the model assuming Poisson error distribution using package lme4 [44]. Because our Poisson models were over-dispersed (checked with the package blmeco, [45]), the final models were fitted assuming negative binomial error distribution using package MASS [46]. We used three random effects reflecting the experimental set-up (non-independence of fish originating from the same population, block structure and multiple measures of the same fish).…”
Section: (D) Data Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%