Comparison of WAIC and posterior predictive approaches for N-mixture models

被引:0
作者
Gaya, Heather E. [1 ]
Ketz, Alison C. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Georgia, Warnell Sch Forestry & Nat Resources, Athens, GA 30602 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Forest & Wildlife Ecol, Wisconsin Cooperat Res Unit, Madison, WI 53706 USA
来源
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS | 2024年 / 14卷 / 01期
基金
英国科研创新办公室;
关键词
Bayesian; eBird; Model selection; N-mixture; Posterior-predictive loss; WAIC; SELECTION;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-024-66643-4
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Hierarchical models are common for ecological analysis, but determining appropriate model selection methods remains an ongoing challenge. To confront this challenge, a suitable method is needed to evaluate and compare available candidate models. We compared performance of conditional WAIC, a joint-likelihood approach to WAIC (WAICj), and posterior-predictive loss for selecting between candidate N-mixture models. We tested these model selection criteria on simulated single-season N-mixture models, simulated multi-season N-mixture models with temporal auto-correlation, and three case studies of single-season N-mixture models based on eBird data. WAICj proved more accurate than the standard conditional formulation or posterior-predictive loss, even when models were temporally correlated, suggesting WAICj is a robust alternative to model selection for N-mixture models.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 43 条
[21]   Model Fit and Comparison in Finite Mixture Models: A Review and a Novel Approach [J].
Grimm, Kevin J. ;
Houpt, Russell ;
Rodgers, Danielle .
FRONTIERS IN EDUCATION, 2021, 6
[22]   A Survey of Feature Set Reduction Approaches for Predictive Analytics Models in the Connected Manufacturing Enterprise [J].
LaCasse, Phillip M. ;
Otieno, Wilkistar ;
Maturana, Francisco P. .
APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2019, 9 (05)
[23]   Comparison of six statistical approaches in the selection of appropriate fish growth models [J].
朱立新 ;
李丽芳 ;
梁振林 .
Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 2009, (03) :457-467
[24]   Comparison of six statistical approaches in the selection of appropriate fish growth models [J].
Zhu Lixin ;
Li Lifang ;
Liang Zhenlin .
CHINESE JOURNAL OF OCEANOLOGY AND LIMNOLOGY, 2009, 27 (03) :457-467
[25]   Comparison of six statistical approaches in the selection of appropriate fish growth models [J].
Lixin Zhu ;
Lifang Li ;
Zhenlin Liang .
Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 2009, 27 :457-467
[26]   Predictive comparison of joint longitudinal-survival modeling: a case study illustrating competing approaches [J].
Timothy E. Hanson ;
Adam J. Branscum ;
Wesley O. Johnson .
Lifetime Data Analysis, 2011, 17 :3-28
[27]   Predictive comparison of joint longitudinal-survival modeling: a case study illustrating competing approaches [J].
Hanson, Timothy E. ;
Branscum, Adam J. ;
Johnson, Wesley O. .
LIFETIME DATA ANALYSIS, 2011, 17 (01) :3-28
[28]   Comparison of approaches to combine species distribution models based on different sets of predictors [J].
Romero, David ;
Olivero, Jesus ;
Brito, Jose Carlos ;
Real, Raimundo .
ECOGRAPHY, 2016, 39 (06) :561-571
[29]   Tests of Simple Slopes in Multiple Regression Models with an Interaction: Comparison of Four Approaches [J].
Liu, Yu ;
West, Stephen G. ;
Levy, Roy ;
Aiken, Leona S. .
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, 2017, 52 (04) :445-464
[30]   Beyond discrimination: A comparison of calibration methods and clinical usefulness of predictive models of readmission risk [J].
Walsh, Colin G. ;
Sharma, Kavya ;
Hripcsak, George .
JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2017, 76 :9-18