scholarly journals Conceptual model uncertainty in groundwater modeling: Combining generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation and Bayesian model averaging

2008 ◽  
Vol 44 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Rojas ◽  
Luc Feyen ◽  
Alain Dassargues
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Model Uncertainty ◽  
Bayesian Model ◽  
Groundwater Modeling ◽  
Bayesian Model Averaging ◽  
Model Averaging ◽  
Uncertainty Estimation ◽  
Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation

scholarly journals Bayesian Model Averaging to Account for Model Uncertainty in Estimates of a Vaccine's Effectiveness

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos R Oliveira ◽  
Eugene D Shapiro ◽  
Daniel M Weinberger
Keyword(s):  
Model Selection ◽  
Model Uncertainty ◽  
Bayesian Model ◽  
Bayesian Model Averaging ◽  
Model Averaging ◽  
Selection Methods ◽  
Final Model ◽  
Negative Case ◽  
Confounder Selection ◽  
Control Study

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are often conducted after the introduction of new vaccines to ensure they provide protection in real-world settings. Although susceptible to confounding, the test-negative case-control study design is the most efficient method to assess VE post-licensure. Control of confounding is often needed during the analyses, which is most efficiently done through multivariable modeling. When a large number of potential confounders are being considered, it can be challenging to know which variables need to be included in the final model. This paper highlights the importance of considering model uncertainty by re-analyzing a Lyme VE study using several confounder selection methods. We propose an intuitive Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) framework for this task and compare the performance of BMA to that of traditional single-best-model-selection methods. We demonstrate how BMA can be advantageous in situations when there is uncertainty about model selection by systematically considering alternative models and increasing transparency.

Using Bayesian model averaging to improve ground motion predictions

2019 ◽  
Vol 220 (2) ◽  
pp. 1368-1378
Author(s):  
M Bertin ◽  
S Marin ◽  
C Millet ◽  
C Berge-Thierry
Keyword(s):  
Ground Motion ◽  
Model Uncertainty ◽  
Bayesian Model ◽  
Bayesian Model Averaging ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Hazard Analysis ◽  
Model Averaging ◽  
Likelihood Estimation ◽  
Predictive Performance ◽  
Out Of Sample

SUMMARY In low-seismicity areas such as Europe, seismic records do not cover the whole range of variable configurations required for seismic hazard analysis. Usually, a set of empirical models established in such context (the Mediterranean Basin, northeast U.S.A., Japan, etc.) is considered through a logic-tree-based selection process. This approach is mainly based on the scientist’s expertise and ignores the uncertainty in model selection. One important and potential consequence of neglecting model uncertainty is that we assign more precision to our inference than what is warranted by the data, and this leads to overly confident decisions and precision. In this paper, we investigate the Bayesian model averaging (BMA) approach, using nine ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) issued from several databases. The BMA method has become an important tool to deal with model uncertainty, especially in empirical settings with large number of potential models and relatively limited number of observations. Two numerical techniques, based on the Markov chain Monte Carlo method and the maximum likelihood estimation approach, for implementing BMA are presented and applied together with around 1000 records issued from the RESORCE-2013 database. In the example considered, it is shown that BMA provides both a hierarchy of GMPEs and an improved out-of-sample predictive performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document