Pith. sign in

REVIEW

A comparison of learning rate selection methods in generalized Bayesian inference

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.11349 v1 pith:RBEJWX3U submitted 2020-12-21 stat.ME stat.CO

classification stat.MEstat.CO
keywords generalizedlearningmethodsratebayesselectioncomparisoncoverage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Generalized Bayes posterior distributions are formed by putting a fractional power on the likelihood before combining with the prior via Bayes's formula. This fractional power, which is often viewed as a remedy for potential model misspecification bias, is called the learning rate, and a number of data-driven learning rate selection methods have been proposed in the recent literature. Each of these proposals has a different focus, a different target they aim to achieve, which makes them difficult to compare. In this paper, we provide a direct head-to-head comparison of these learning rate selection methods in various misspecified model scenarios, in terms of several relevant metrics, in particular, coverage probability of the generalized Bayes credible regions. In some examples all the methods perform well, while in others the misspecification is too severe to be overcome, but we find that the so-called generalized posterior calibration algorithm tends to outperform the others in terms of credible region coverage probability.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools