arxiv: v1 [stat.me] 3 Apr 2018
|
|
- Ethan Hancock
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Grouped Heterogeneous Mixture Modeling for Clustered Data Shonosuke Sugasawa arxiv: v1 [stat.me] 3 Apr 2018 Center of Spatial Information Science, The University of Tokyo Abstract Clustered data which has a grouping structure (e.g. postal area, school, individual, species) appears in a variety of scientific fields. The goal of statistical analysis of clustered data is modeling the response as a function of covariates while accounting for heterogeneity among clusters. For this purpose, we consider estimating clusterwise conditional distributions by mixtures of latent conditional distributions common to all the clusters with cluster-wise different mixing proportions. For modeling the mixing proportions, we propose a structure that clusters are divided into finite number of groups and mixing proportions are assumed to be the same within the same group. The proposed model is interpretable and the maximum likelihood estimator is easy to compute via the generalized EM algorithm. In the setting where the cluster sizes grows with, but much more slowly than, the number of clusters, some asymptotic properties of the maximum likelihood estimator are presented. Furthermore, we propose an information criterion for selecting two tuning parameters, number of groups and latent conditional distributions. Numerical studies demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms some other existing methods. Key words: Clustered data; EM algorithm; Maximum likelihood; Mixture of regressions 1
2 1 Introduction Clustered data which has a grouping structure (e.g. postal area, school, individual, species) appears in a variety of scientific fields. The goal of statistical analysis of clustered data is modeling the response as a function of covariates while accounting for heterogeneity among clusters. The standard approach for analyzing clustered data is using mixed models or random effect models (e.g. Demidenko, 2013; Jiang, 2007). However, since this approach essentially aims at modeling conditional means in each cluster, it would not be plausible when the data distribution is skewed or multimodal. As an alternative modeling strategy, the finite mixture model (McLachlan and Peel, 2000) has been extensively applied for its flexibility to capture distributional relationship between response and covariates. For independent (non-clustered) data, the mixture model with covariates was originally proposed in Jacobs et al. (1991), known as mixture-of-experts, and a large body of literature has been concerned with flexible modeling of the conditional distribution of non-clustered data, e.g. Jordan and Jacobs (1994); Geweke and Keane (2007); Chung and Dunson (2009); Villani et al. (2009, 2012); Nguyen and McLachlan (2016). However, these methods cannot be directly imported into the context of analyzing clustered data. One possible direct adaptation of these mixture models into modeling cluster-wise conditional distributions is to apply the models to the whole dataset without taking account of cluster information (we call global mixture modeling), which produces a result that all the estimated cluster-wise distributions are the same. Nevertheless, such result would be inappropriate and the relationship between response and covariates might be misunderstood. Another possible adaptation is fitting the mixture models separately to each cluster (we call local mixture modeling), so that the cluster-wise heterogeneity would be addressed. However, since it is often the case that cluster sizes are not large in practice, the estimation might be unstable. For modeling cluster-wise conditional distributions, Rubin and Wu (1997) and Ng and McLachlan (2014) proposed a mixture model of random effects models, but it would be computationally burdensome since the estimation of a single random effects 2
3 model is still presents a major challenge for the non-normal responses (e.g. Hui et al., 2017b). Moreover, the result from mixture of mixed models would be difficult to interpret. An alternative approach is latent mixture modeling (Sugasawa et al., 2017) that can be regarded as a compromised model of global and local mixture models, in which the cluster-wise conditional distributions are expressed as the following mixture: L f i (y x) = π ik h k (y x; φ k ), i = 1,..., m, (1) k=1 where m is the number of clusters, h k (y x; φ k ) is a latent conditional distribution common to all the clusters, which typically comes from generalized linear model with parameter φ k, and π i = (π i1,..., π il ) is the cluster-wise mixing proportions. In the above model, cluster-wise heterogeneity is captured by the mixing proportions π i, so that the model would be easy to interpret. For modeling π i, Sun et al. (2007) proposed the use of a logistic mixed model while Sugasawa et al. (2017) proposed the use of a Dirichlet distribution. In both models, due to the additional stochastic structure, parameter estimation requires numerically intensive methods such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo or Monte Carlo EM algorithm as used in Sun et al. (2007) and Sugasawa et al. (2017), respectively. Apart from parametric modeling of cluster-wise conditional distributions, Rosen et al. (2000) and Tang and Qu (2016) proposed a mixture modeling based on the generalized estimating equation, but the primary interest in these works is estimation of the component distributions in the mixture by taking account of correlations within clusters. Moreover, in nonparametric Bayesian approach, hierarchical Dirichlet processes (Teh et al., 2006) might have similar philosophy to latent mixture modeling in that both methods assumes sharing mixing components among clusters, and Rodoriguez et al. (2008) is also concerned with modeling cluster-wise conditional distributions in terms of Bayesian nonparametrics. Hence, most of modeling strategies of cluster-wise conditional distributions are computationally intensive or have poor interpretability. In other words, approaches to estimating cluster-wise conditional distributions while accounting for cluster-wise heterogeneity are still limited. 3
4 The purpose of this paper is to introduce an effective mixture modeling called grouped heterogeneous mixture (GHM) modeling that is easy to fit and interpret. We develop our method in the framework of latent mixture model (1), and introduce a novel structure for the mixing proportions π i that π 1,..., π m can be divided into finite number of groups and π i s within the same groups have the same mixing proportions. Specifically, let g i, i = 1,..., m, be a group membership variable such that g i = 1,..., G, where G is the number of groups, and π g = (π g1,..., π gl ) be unknown mixing proportions in the gth group. Then the proposed structure of π i is π i = π gi. Since we do not know how the clusters are divided into G groups, we treat the group membership variable g i as an unknown variable (parameter), and estimate it based on data. Owing to the simple structure of π i, the likelihood function of the GHM model can be easily obtained, and the maximization of the function can be easily carried out by the generalized EM algorithm (Meng and Rubin, 1993) as will be described in Section 2. Note that the estimation of group membership g i is closely related to k-means algorithm (Forgy, 1965), and the idea of grouping parameters have been recently considered in the context of panel data analysis (e.g. Hahn and Moon, 2010; Bonhomme and Manresa, 2015; Ando and Bai, 2016), but this paper is the first one to use the idea for modeling cluster-wise mixing proportions. Since the number of group membership variable g i grows with the number of clusters, the cluster size should also grow with the number of clusters to consistently estimate g i. Nevertheless, owing to the grouping structure, the model parameters including g i are shown to be consistent under the setting where the cluster size grows considerably more slowly than the number of clusters. Specifically, for n 1 being the minimum cluster size among m clusters, our asymptotic framework is m and m/n ν 1 0 for some ν > 0, which would be met in various applications. The rest of paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the GHM modeling, describe the generalized EM algorithm, and propose BIC-type information criterion for selecting numbers of latent distributions, L, and groups G. In Section 3, we illustrate the asymptotic properties of the estimator of model parameters. In Section 4, we carry out numerical experiments to demonstrate the performance of the 4
5 GHM modeling relative to global and local mixture models or random effects models, based on simulated data as well as real-world data. 2 Grouped Heterogeneous Mixture Modeling 2.1 The model Suppose that we have the clustered observations y ij, i = 1,..., m, j = 1,..., n i, with an associated p-dimensional vector of covariates x ij. Let f i (y x) be a density or probability mass function of y ij given x ij, which are assumed to be the same within clusters but different across clusters. Our primary interest is estimating the clusterwise conditional density f i (y x) from the data. To this end, we propose the following grouped heterogeneous mixture (GHM) model: L f i (y x) = π gi kh k (y x; φ k ), i = 1,..., m, (2) k=1 where h k s are latent conditional densities common to all the clusters, g i {1,..., G} denotes group membership variable and φ k is a vector of unknown parameters in the kth latent densities. As mentioned in Section 1, the key notion in the GHM model (2) is to assume that m clusters can be divided into G groups (sub-clusters) and the same mixing proportions (the same conditional density) holds within the same groups. The latent model h k should be specified by the user depending on the type of response variable y ij, and generalized linear models would be a typical choice. For instance, we may use a normal density with mean x t β k and variance σ 2 k when the response takes continuous values, or a Bernoulli distribution with success probability exp(x t β k )/{1 + exp(x t β k )} when the response is binary. We treat the group membership variable g i as an unknown parameter and estimate it based on the data, which means that clusters are adaptively grouped by reflecting information of the data. Moreover, in the GHM model (2), the heterogeneity among clusters can be expressed by the mixing proportions π gi k, so that the GHM model would be flexible yet parsimonious, so that the estimated results would 5
6 be interpretable. There are three types of unknown parameters in (2), π = {π gk, g = 1,..., G, k = 1,..., L} being the mixing proportions in each group, γ = {g 1,..., g m } being the set of group membership variables, and φ = {φ k, k = 1,..., L} being the structural parameters in the latent densities. 2.2 Parameter estimation via generalized EM algorithm Let Θ = (γ, π, φ) be the set of unknown parameters. We first consider estimating Θ under known numbers of groups G and latent components L. The estimation of G and L will be given in the end of this section. Given the data, the log-likelihood function of Θ is obtained in the following closed form: Q(Θ) = ( n i L ) log π gi kh k (y ij x ij ; φ k ). (3) i=1 j=1 k=1 The maximum likelihood estimator Θ of Θ is defined as the maximizer of Q(Θ). As is often the case in the context of mixture modeling, we develop an iterative method for maximizing Q(Θ) with respect to Θ. Specifically, we use the generalized EM (GEM) algorithm (Meng and Rubin, 1993). To this end, we consider the following hierarchical expression of the model (2): y ij z ij = k h k (y ij x ij ; φ k ), P(z ij = k) = π gi k, (4) where z ij s are latent variables representing the membership of y ij s. Given z ij s, the complete log-likelihood is given by L c (Θ) = n i L I(z ij = k) {log h k (y ij x ij ; φ k ) + log π gi k}. i=1 j=1 k=1 In the E-step, we need to compute expectations of the latent variables z ij s. Under the hierarchical expression (4), the conditional (posterior) probability of z ij = k given 6
7 observations Y = {y ij, j = 1,..., n i, i = 1,..., m} evaluated at Θ = Θ (r) is given by P(z ij = k Y ; Θ (r) ) w (r) ijk = π (r) g i k h k(y ij x ij ; φ (r) k ) L l=1 π(r) g i l h l(y ij x ij ; φ (r) l ), so that the objective function to be maximized in the M-step is obtained as Q(Θ Θ (r) ) = L n i k=1 i=1 j=1 w (r) ijk log h k(y ij x ij ; φ k ) + i=1 k=1 L n i log π gi k j=1 w (r) ijk (5) Q 1 (φ Θ (r) ) + Q 2 (γ, π Θ (r) ). It is observed that the maximization of Q 1 (φ Θ (r) ) with respect to φ can be divided into L maximization problems and φ 1,..., φ L can be separately updated. On the other hand, maximizing Q 2 (γ, π Θ (r) ) includes discrete optimization of γ on the space {1,..., G} m, which would be slightly complicated. Hence, instead of simultaneously maximizing with respect to γ and π, we first maximize Q 2 (γ (r), π Θ (r) ) with respect to π and we set π (r+1) to the maximizer, and then, maximize Q 2 (γ, π (r+1) Θ (r) ) with respect to γ to get γ (r+1). This updating process guarantees that monotone increasing of the objective function, that is, Q 2 (γ (r), π (r) Θ (r) ) Q 2 (γ (r+1), π (r+1) Θ (r) ). The proposed GEM algorithm is summarized in what follows. GEM algorithm (1) Set the initial values Θ (0) and r = 0. (2) (E-step) Compute the following weights: w (r) ijk = π (r) g i k h k(y ij x ij ; φ (r) k ) L l=1 π(r) g i l h l(y ij x ij ; φ (r) l ). (3) (M-step-1) Solving the following maximization problem and set φ (r+1) k = φ k : { m n i } φ k = argmax w (r) ijk log h k(y ij x ij ; φ k ), k = 1,..., L. i=1 j=1 7
8 (4) (M-step-2) Update π gk and g i as follows: ( 1 π (r+1) gk = i:g (r) i =g i) n i:g g (r+1) i = argmax g=1,...,g { L n i (r) i =g j=1 k=1 log π (r+1) gk w (r) ijk, g = 1,..., G, k = 1,..., L, n i j=1 } w (r) ijk, i = 1,..., m, (5) If the algorithm has converged, the the algorithm is terminated. Otherwise, set r = r + 1 and go back to Step (2). Note that updating φ k requires maximizing the weighted log-likelihood of kth latent distribution, which can be easily and efficiently carried out as long as the latent density h k is familiar e.g. generalized linear models. Moreover, for updating g i, we simply compute all the values of the objective function for g = 1,..., G and select the maximizer. Therefore, all the M-steps in the GEM algorithm are easy to execute, thereby the GEM algorithm is computationally quite easy to carry out. Finally, for selecting the values of G (number of groups) and L (number of latent components), we adopt the following BIC-type criterion: BIC(G, L) = 2Q( Θ) + log N { ql + G(L 1) + m }, where N = m i=1 n i is the number of whole samples, and q = dim(φ k ). The suitable values of G and L are set to the minimizer of BIC(G, L). 3 Asymptotic Properties We investigates the large-sample properties of the maximum likelihood estimator Θ when the cluster-sizes grow with the number of clusters. Without loss of generality, we suppose that the cluster labels are assigned such that the cluster-size increases with the cluster index, that is, n 1 n 2 n m. Moreover, we assume that m as well as n 1 as considered in literatures (e.g. Vonesh et al., 2002; Hui et al., 2017a) regarding estimation of random effects models. However, we consider 8
9 asymptotics under the setting m and m/n ν 1 0 for some ν > 0, that is, the cluster-sizes are allowed to grow much more slowly than m, which would be met in various applications. In what follows, we further assume that the number of groups G and the number of latent conditional distributions L are known. Under the setting, we define γ 0 and ψ 0 be the true parameters of γ and ψ = (π, φ). We now present asymptotic properties of the maximum likelihood estimator, whose proof is given in Appendix. Theorem 1. Under Assumptions given in Appendix and m and m/n ν 1 0 for some ν > 0, it holds that 1 m i=1 k=1 L ( 1 ) ( πĝi k π 0 gi 0k)2 = O p m (6) mfm ( Θ) 1/2 ( ψ ψ 0 ) N(0, I dim(ψ) ), (7) where F m (Θ) is the Fisher information matrix defined in Appendix. Although the number of cluster-wise mixing proportions π i = π gi k grows at the number of clusters m, (6) shows that they are consistently estimated and the convergence rate depends on m. Moreover, (7) shows that the structural parameters φ in latent distributions and group-wise mixing proportions π whose dimensions are fixed regardless of m and n 1 are m-consistent. 4 Numerical Studies 4.1 Simulation study: continuous response We investigate the finite sample performance of the proposed method together with some existing methods. We consider m = 40 clusters and assume that each cluster i (i = 1,..., m) has the following cluster-wise conditional distribution: f i (y x 1, x 2 ) = π i φ(y; α i0 + α i1 x 1 + α i2 x 2, 1) + (1 π i )φ(y; β i0 + β i1 x 1 + β i2 x 2, (1.5) 2 ), 9
10 where π i is a mixing proportion and φ( ; a, b) denotes a normal density function with mean a and variance b. We generated x 1 from the uniform distribution on ( 0.2, 0.8) and x 2 from Bernoulli distribution with success probability 0.5. We consider the following two cases of the mixing proportion π i : (A1) π i Beta(2, 1), (A2) π i TP(0.2, 0.5, 0.8), where TP(a 1, a 2, a 3 ) denotes an uniform three-point distribution on a 1, a 2 and a 3. The mixing proportion π i varies across all the clusters in the case (A1) while π i s are divided into three groups and clusters within the same groups have the same mixing proportions in the case (A2). Moreover, we consider the following two cases of the structural parameters Θ i = (α i0, α i1, α i2, β i0, β i1, β i2 ): (B1) α i0 = α i2 = 1, α i1 = 2, β i0 = β i2 = 1, β i1 = 2, (B2) α i0, α i2 N( 1, (0.2) 2 ), β i0, β i2 N(1, (0.2) 2 ), α i1 N(2, (0.2) 2 ), β i1 N( 2, (0.2) 2 ). Note that the structural parameters Θ i in the mixing distributions are the same over all the clusters in the case (B1), but the mixing distributions are different over all the clusters in the case (B2). We consider the following 4 scenarios produced by all the combinations of the cases of π i and Θ i : scenario case (π i ) (A1) (A2) (A1) (A2) case (Θ i ) (B1) (B1) (B2) (B2) From the conditional distribution, we generated n samples in each cluster, and we considered n = 80 and n = 160. For the simulated dataset, we applied the proposed grouped heterogeneous mixture (GHM) model as well as global mixture (GM), local mixture (LM) and random effects (RE) model. In the GHM model, normal regression models are used for latent conditional distributions and the suitable numbers of groups 10
11 and latent components are selected by BIC among combinations of G {2,..., 8} and L = 2, 3. In the GM and LM models, we consider mixtures of normal regressions and the number of components is selected by BIC from L {1,..., 4}. For the RE model, only a random intercept term is included. For fitting GM, LM and RE, we use the maximum likelihood estimators of model parameters. Based on these methods, we construct an estimator of cluster-wise conditional densities f i (y x 1, x 2 ), and compute the following mean integrated squared errors (MISE): MISE(x 2 ) = 1 m i= { } 2dydx1 fi (y x 1, x 2 ) f i (y x 1, x 2 ), which is approximated by finite sum over equally-spaced 51 grid points from 5 to 5 for y and from 0.2 to 0.8 for x 1. We repeated simulating a dataset and computing the MISE for 500 times. Since the results of MISE(1) and MISE(0) are quite similar, we only report the boxplots of MISE(1) in Figure 1, which shows that GHM clearly outperforms the other methods in both all the scenarios. It should be noted that LM does not work well in spite of its flexibility in almost all the scenarios. This is because fitting a mixture model based on moderate cluster sizes like n = 80 or n = 160 would be unstable. 4.2 Simulation study: binary response We next investigate the performance when the response is binary. To this end, we consider the following cluster-wise conditional distributions: f i (y x 1, x 2 ) = π i Ber(y; µ 1i (x 1, x 2 )) + (1 π i )Ber(y; µ 2i (x 1, x 2 )), where Ber( ; p) denotes a Bernoulli probability function with success probability p, logit{µ 1i (x 1, x 2 )} = α i0 + α i1 x 1 + α i2 x 2 and logit{µ 2i (x 1, x 2 )} = β i0 + β i1 x 1 + β i2 x 2. The two covariates x 1 and x 2 are generated in the same way as the previous section, and we considered the same four scenarios regarding the settings of the mixing proportions and distributions. Based on the above cluster-wise conditional distribution, 11
12 scenario 1 (n=80) scenario 2 (n=80) scenario 3 (n=80) scenario 4 (n=80) scenario 1 (n=160) scenario 2 (n=160) scenario 3 (n=160) scenario 4 (n=160) Figure 1: Boxplots of logarithm of MISE(1) (log-mise) averaged over x 1 in four scenarios with n = 80 (upper) and n = 160 (lower) when response is Gaussian. 12
13 we generated n = 80 and n = 160 samples in each cluster. For the simulated dataset, we applied the same four methods as considered in Section 4.1. We used a binomial regression as latent or mixing distributions in GHM, GM and LM, and a logistic mixed regression model as RE. Similarly to Section 4.1, we competed the following mean integrated squared errors (MISE): MISE(x 2 ) = 1 m 1 i=1 y= { } 2dx1 fi (y x 1, x 2 ) f i (y x 1, x 2 ), where the integral is approximated by a finite sum over equally-spaced 51 grid points from 0.2 to 0.8. In Figure 2, we show boxplots of MISE(1) based on 500 replications in four scenarios. We can observe similar results that GHM outperforms the other methods in all the scenarios. 4.3 Butterfly data We consider an application of the proposed method to Butterfly data (Oliver et al., 2006). The dataset is consists of abundance of Butterflies at S = 66 sites in Boulder County Open Space in the years 1999 and For each site, geographical information (longitude and latitute), habitat characteristics (grassland type and quality) and landscape context (percentage surrounding urbanization) are available, so that we use the information as covariates. Covariate taking continuous values were scaled to have mean 0 and variance 1. By omitting species being presence in smaller than three sites, there were m = 33 species. We let y is be binary outcome representing presence (y is = 1) and absence (y is = 0) of species i in the site s with i = 1,..., m and s = 1,..., S. For the dataset, we applied the following GHM model: L y is π gi kber(logit(α k + x t sβ k )), k=1 where g i {1,..., G}, Ber(p) denotes a Bernoulli distribution with success probability p and x s is a vector of covariates in the site s. The number of group G and latent 13
14 scenario 1 (n=80) scenario 1 (n=160) scenario 2 (n=80) scenario 2 (n=160) scenario 3 (n=80) scenario 3 (n=160) scenario 4 (n=80) scenario 4 (n=160) Figure 2: Boxplots of logarithm of MISE(1) (log-mise) averaged over x 1 in four scenarios with n = 80 (upper) and n = 160 (lower) when response is binary. 14
15 Table 1: Estimates of regression coefficients in L = 3 latent logistic regression models. Latent 1 Latent 2 Latent 3 Intercept Latitude Longitude Percentage of building Percentage of urban vegetation Habitat (mixed) Habitat (short) Habitat (tall) Table 2: Estimates of mixing proportions and number of species included in G = 5 groups. Group #(species) Latent Latent Latent conditional distributions L were selected by BIC-type criterion over G = 2,..., 8 and L = 2, 3, 4, and G = 5 and L = 3 were selected. This means that 33 species can be divided into 5 groups and each group-wise conditional distribution is expressed as a mixture of three logistic regression models. In Table 1, estimates of regression coefficients in latent 3 logistic regression models are reported, which shows that the estimates are quite different over the models. Moreover, in Table 2, estimates of mixing proportions in 5 groups are shown. Although the estimates of mixing proportions are slightly similar in group 2 and group 5, the mixing proportions are entirely very different over groups, and the difference among groups can be represented in the mixing proportions. For comparison of predictive performance, 5 or 10 sites are randomly omitted to act as test data. Then, we applied the four methods, GHM, GM, LM, RE, to the reaming data (training data) to construct a predictive model for the test data. Similarly to Section 4.2, we considered a mixture of logistic regression models for 15
16 GM and LM, and a logistic random intercept model as RE. The number of mixture components in LM and GM were selected by BIC. To asses the predictive performance, we computed likelihood of the test data (we call test likelihood) based on the estimated model. This procedure was repeated for 100 times, so that such test likelihood are computed for each replication and method. We found that the test likelihood of LM were very small compared with other methods possibly because cluster size (s = 66) is not so large and there are 7 covariate. Moreover, proportions of presence are not small in some species, which may lead to unstable results of fitting a mixture model to each species. For the other methods, we show the test likelihood in each replication in Figure 3. We can observe that the test likelihood of GHM is substantially larger than those of the other methods in almost all the replications, which shows that better prediction performance of GHM than the other methods #(omitted sites)=5 Replication Test likelihood GHM GM RE #(omitted sites)=10 Replication Test likelihood GHM GM RE Figure 3: Plots of likelihoods of test data for 100 replications of two cases of number of omitted sites, 5 (left) and 10 (right). 16
17 5 Final remarks Estimation of cluster-wise conditional distributions is a powerful tool to reveal the distributional relationship between response and covariates while accounting for heterogeneity among clusters. For this purpose, we proposed a novel mixture modeling called grouped heterogeneous mixture (GHM) modeling for estimating luster-wise conditional distributions. The estimation of the GHM model is easily carried our by using the generalized EM algorithm. Under the setting where the cluster size grows with, but considerably slowly than, the number of clusters, we revealed asymptotic properties of the maximum likelihood estimator. In this work, we were not concerned with a problem caused by the dimension of the structural parameters φ in the latent distributions. Such problem is typically related to the number of covariates, and the proposed method might breakdown when the number of covariates are very large. In this case, variable selection or regularization is needed. In the framework of mixture modeling, there are several works concerned with variable selection via regularization (penalization) methods (e.g. Hui et al., 2015; Khalili and Chen, 2007). The adaptation of these methods into our framework would be a valuable future study. Acknowledgements This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 16H Appendix: Proof of Theorem 1 We require the following regularity conditions: A1. The density (probability) function g(y X; γ, ψ) m ni i=1 j=1 f i(y ij x ij ; g i, ψ) is identifiable in Θ up to the permutation of the component and grouping labels. A2. The Fisher information matrix F m (Θ) = E [ ( ) ( ) ] t log g(y X; γ, ψ) log g(y X; γ, ψ) ψ ψ 17
18 is finite and positive definite at ψ = ψ 0 and γ = γ 0. A3. There exists an open subset ω of Ω containing true parameters ψ, such that there exists functions M k (x, y), k = 1, 2, 3, with f i (y x; γ, ψ) f i (y x; γ, ψ) < M 1(x, y), log f i (y x; γ, ψ) < M 2s (x, y), ψ s 2 log f i (y x; γ, ψ) < M 3rs (x, y), ψ r ψ s for arbitrary γ and γ. Moreover, E[M 1 (x, y) 2 ] <, E[M 2s (x, y) 2 ] < and E[M 3rs (x, y) 2 ] <. A4. ψ 0 is an interior point in the compact set Ω R dim(ψ). We define a set of neighborhood of ψ 0 as N η = {ψ 0 +ηu; u = 1}, where η is a scalar, u R dim(ψ), and denotes the L 2 -norm. We first show the following lemma. Lemma 1. For any δ > 0 and ψ N η, it holds that 1 m i=1 I(ĝ i (ψ) g i0 ) = o p (n δ 1 ). Proof. From Markov s inequality, it follows that ( ) 1 P I(ĝ i (ψ) g i0 ) > εn δ 1 m i=1 for arbitrary ε > 0 and ψ N η. Note that P ( ĝ i (ψ) gi 0 ) g g 0 i = g g 0 i ( n i P j=1 ( n i P j=1 nδ 1 mε P(ĝ i (ψ) g i0 ) (8) i=1 n i log f i (y ij ; g, ψ) j=1 log f i(y ij ; g, ψ) f i (y ij ; g 0 i, ψ) 0 ). ) log f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) 18
19 Moreover, from Markov s inequality, it holds that ( n i P log f i(y ij ; g, ψ) ) { [ ( 1 f j=1 i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) 0 E exp 2 log f )]} i(y ij ; g, ψ) ni f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) { [ ]} f i (y ij ; g, ψ) = exp n i log E f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ). Note that 1 f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) = 1 f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ0 ) + f(y ij; gi 0, ψ ) 3/2 (ψ ψ 0 ) t ψ f i(y ij ; gi 0, ψ) ψ=ψ 1 = f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ0 ) + f(y ij; gi 0, ψ ) 1/2 (ψ ψ 0 ) t ψ log f i(y ij ; gi 0, ψ), ψ=ψ where ψ lies on the line segment joining ψ and ψ 0. Therefore, under Assumption A3, we have [ ] f i (y ij ; g, ψ) f i (y ij ; g, ψ) E f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) = f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ)f i(y ij ; gi 0, ψ 0 )dy ij [ ( = f i (y ij ; g, ψ)f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ0 )dy ij + (ψ ψ 0 ) t E ψ log f i(y ij ; gi 0, ψ) 1 H(f( ; g, ψ), f( ; g 0 i, ψ 0 )) + Cη, ψ=ψ ) ] f i (y ij ; g, ψ) f(y ij ; gi 0, ψ ) where H(f 0, f 1 ) denotes the Hellinger distance between f 0 and f 1 and C is a constant. Under Assumption A1, inf ψ Nη H(f( ; g, ψ), f( ; gi 0, ψ0 )) > 0 when g gi 0, so that for sufficiently small η, there exist a constant c > 0 such that { } sup log 1 H(f( ; g, ψ), f( ; gi 0, ψ 0 )) + Cη < c. ψ N η Hence, we have ( n i P log f i(y ij ; g, ψ) ) f i (y ij ; gi 0, ψ) 0 exp( cn i ) = o(n δ 1 ), j=1 thereby the right side of (8) is o(1), which completes the proof. 19
20 We next show the consistency of Θ as given in the following lemma: Lemma 2. As m and n 1, it holds that Θ Θ 0. Proof. Define u R dim(ψ) such that u = 1 and γ s = (g 1s,..., g ms ) {1,..., G} m such that d(γ s, γ 0 ) m i=1 I(g is g0 i ) = s. Further, we define R(ψ, γ) 1 N R i (ψ, g i ) = 1 N Q(Θ). i=1 Note that R(ψ 0 + ηu, γ s) R(ψ 0, γ 0 ) = R(ψ 0 + ηu, γ 0 ) R(ψ 0, γ 0 ) + R(ψ 0 + ηu, γ s) R(ψ 0 + ηu, γ 0 ) = I 1 + I 2. Under Assumption A2 and A3, using the similar argument given in the proof of Theorem 1 in Hui et al. (2015), it holds that I 1 = o(η). Regarding I 2, it is noted that I 2 1 N = 1 N R i (ψ 0 + ηu, g is ) R i(ψ 0 + ηu, gi 0 ) i=1 I(g is g0 i ) R i (ψ 0 + ηu, g is ) R i(ψ 0 + ηu, gi 0 ) sc, i=1 for some C > 0. Therefore, for any ε, there exists a local maximum inside the set {ψ 0 + ηu; u = 1} {γ ; d(γ, γ 0 ) < s}, so that the consistency follows. We define the following objective functions: Q(ψ) = ( n i L ) log πĝi (ψ)kh k (y ij x ij ; φ k ). i=1 j=1 k=1 Q(ψ) = ( n i L ) log π g 0 i k h k(y ij x ij ; φ k ), i=1 j=1 k=1 and we define ψ and ψ as the maximizer of Q(ψ) and Q(ψ), respectively. Note that 20
21 mfm ( ψ) 1/2 ( ψ ψ 0 ) N(0, I dim(ψ) ). Note that, from Lemma 1, it holds that sup Q(ψ) Q(ψ) = o p (n δ 1 ). (9) ψ N η Then, from the definition of ψ and ψ, we have 0 Q( ψ) Q( ψ) = { Q( ψ) Q( ψ)} + { Q( ψ) Q( ψ)} { Q( ψ) Q( ψ)} + { Q( ψ) Q( ψ)} = o p (n δ 1 ), where the last equality follows from (9) and ψ, ψ N η for large n i since ψ and ψ are consistent. from (9), so that ψ ψ = o p (n δ 1 ). Hence, it follows that m( ψ ψ 0 ) = m( ψ ψ 0 ) + m( ψ ψ) = m( ψ ψ 0 ) + o p ( mn δ 1 ) = m( ψ ψ 0 ) + o p (1) under m/n ν 0 for some ν > 0, which establishes (7). Moreover, from Lemma 1 and the asymptotic property of ψ, it holds that 1 m 1 m i=1 k=1 i=1 k=1 L ( πĝi k π g 0 i k )2 = o p (n δ 1 ), 1 m L ( 1 ( π g 0 i k π0 gi 0k)2 = O p m ), i=1 k=1 L ( π g 0 i k π gi 0k)2 = o p (n δ 1 ) thereby (6) follows under m/n ν 0. References Ando, T. and Bai, J. (2016). Panel data models with grouped factor structure under unknown group membership. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 31, Bonhomme, S. and Manresa, E. (2015). Grouped pattern of heterogeneity in panel data. Econometrica, 83,
22 Chung, Y. and Dunson, D. B. (2009). Nonparametric Bayes conditional distribution modeling with variable selection. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104, Demidenko, E. (2013). Mixed Models: Theory and Applications with R, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics, New York, Wiley. Forgy, E. W. (1965). Cluster analysis of multivariate data: efficiency vs. interpretability of classifications. Biometrics, 21, Geweke, J. and Keane, M. (2007). Smoothly mixing regressions. Journal of Econometrics, 138, Khalili, A. and Chen, J. (2007). Variable selection in finite mixture of regression models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102, Hahn, J. And Moon, H. (2010). Panel data models with finite number of multiple equilibria. Econometric Theory, 26, Hui, F. K. C., Muller, S. and Welsh, A. H. (2017). Joint selection in mixed models using regularized PQL. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112, Hui, F. K. C., Warton, D. I. and Foster, A. D. (2015). Multi-species distribution modeling using penalized mixture of regressions. The Annals of Applied Statistics, 9, Hui, F. K. C., Warton, D. I., Ormerod, J. T., Haapaniemi, V. and Taskinen, S. (2017). Variational approximations for generalized linear latent variable models. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 26, Jacobs, R. A., Jordan, M. I., Nowlan, S. J. and Hinton, G. E. (1991). Adaptive mixtures of local experts. Neural Computation, 3, Jiang, J. (2007). Linear and generalized linear mixed models and their applications, Springer Series in Statistics, New York, Springer. 22
23 Jordan, M. I. and Jacobs, R. A. (1994). Hierarchical mixtures of experts and the EM algorithm. Neural Computation, 214, McLachlan, G. J. and Peel, D. (2000). Finite Mixture Models, New York, Wiley. Meng, X. L. and Rubin, D. B. (1993). Maximum likelihood estimation via the ECM algorithm: a general framework. Biometrika, 80, Ng, S. K. and McLachlan, G. J. (2007). Extension of mixture-of-experts networks for binary classification of hierarchical data. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 41, Ng, S. K. and McLachlan, G. J. (2014). Mixture models for clustering multilevel growth trajectories. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 71, Nguyen, H. D. and McLachlan, G. J. (2016). Laplace mixture of linear experts. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 93, Oliver, J. C., Prudic, K. L. and Collinge, S. K. (2006). Boulder county open space butterfly diversity and abundance. Ecology, 87, Rodriguez, A., Dunson, D. B. and Gelfand, A. E. (2008). The nested Dirichlet process. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103, Rosen, O., Jiang, W. and Tanner, M. A. (2000). Mixtures of marginal models. Biometrika, 87, Rubin, D. B. and Wu, Y. (1997). Modeling schizophrenic behavior using general mixture components. Biometrics, 53, Sugasawa, S., Kobayashi, G. and Kawakubo, Y. (2016). Latent mixture modeling for clustered data. arxiv: Sun, Z., Rosen, O. and Sampson, A. R. (2007). Multivariate Bernoulli mixture models with application to postmortem tissue studies in schizophrenia. Biometrics, 63,
24 Tang, X. and Qu, A. (2016). Mixture modeling for longitudinal data. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 25, Teh, Y. W., Jordan, M. I., Beal, M. J. and Blei, D. M. (2006). Hierarchical Dirichlet processes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 101, Villani, M., Kohn, R. and Giordani, P. (2009). Regression density estimation using smooth adaptive Gaussian mixtures. Journal of Econometrics, 153, Villani, M., Kohn, R. and Nott, D. J. (2012). Generalized smooth finite mixtures. Journal of Econometrics, 171, Vonesh, E. F., Wang, H., Nie, L. and Majumdar, D. (2002). Conditional second-order generalized estimating equations for generalized linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97,
STA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning
STA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning Russ Salakhutdinov Department of Statistics! rsalakhu@utstat.toronto.edu! http://www.utstat.utoronto.ca/~rsalakhu/ Sidney Smith Hall, Room 6002 Lecture 3 Linear
More informationBayesian Modeling of Conditional Distributions
Bayesian Modeling of Conditional Distributions John Geweke University of Iowa Indiana University Department of Economics February 27, 2007 Outline Motivation Model description Methods of inference Earnings
More informationBayesian non-parametric model to longitudinally predict churn
Bayesian non-parametric model to longitudinally predict churn Bruno Scarpa Università di Padova Conference of European Statistics Stakeholders Methodologists, Producers and Users of European Statistics
More informationThe Australian National University and The University of Sydney. Supplementary Material
Statistica Sinica: Supplement HIERARCHICAL SELECTION OF FIXED AND RANDOM EFFECTS IN GENERALIZED LINEAR MIXED MODELS The Australian National University and The University of Sydney Supplementary Material
More informationPattern Recognition and Machine Learning
Christopher M. Bishop Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning ÖSpri inger Contents Preface Mathematical notation Contents vii xi xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Example: Polynomial Curve Fitting 4 1.2 Probability
More informationNonparametric Bayesian Methods (Gaussian Processes)
[70240413 Statistical Machine Learning, Spring, 2015] Nonparametric Bayesian Methods (Gaussian Processes) Jun Zhu dcszj@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn http://bigml.cs.tsinghua.edu.cn/~jun State Key Lab of Intelligent
More informationDetermining the number of components in mixture models for hierarchical data
Determining the number of components in mixture models for hierarchical data Olga Lukočienė 1 and Jeroen K. Vermunt 2 1 Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000
More informationVariational Bayesian Dirichlet-Multinomial Allocation for Exponential Family Mixtures
17th Europ. Conf. on Machine Learning, Berlin, Germany, 2006. Variational Bayesian Dirichlet-Multinomial Allocation for Exponential Family Mixtures Shipeng Yu 1,2, Kai Yu 2, Volker Tresp 2, and Hans-Peter
More informationUnsupervised Learning
Unsupervised Learning Bayesian Model Comparison Zoubin Ghahramani zoubin@gatsby.ucl.ac.uk Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit, and MSc in Intelligent Systems, Dept Computer Science University College
More informationThe EM Algorithm for the Finite Mixture of Exponential Distribution Models
Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sciences, Vol. 9, 2014, no. 2, 57-64 HIKARI Ltd, www.m-hikari.com http://dx.doi.org/10.12988/ijcms.2014.312133 The EM Algorithm for the Finite Mixture of Exponential Distribution
More informationMCMC for big data. Geir Storvik. BigInsight lunch - May Geir Storvik MCMC for big data BigInsight lunch - May / 17
MCMC for big data Geir Storvik BigInsight lunch - May 2 2018 Geir Storvik MCMC for big data BigInsight lunch - May 2 2018 1 / 17 Outline Why ordinary MCMC is not scalable Different approaches for making
More informationBayesian Methods for Machine Learning
Bayesian Methods for Machine Learning CS 584: Big Data Analytics Material adapted from Radford Neal s tutorial (http://ftp.cs.utoronto.ca/pub/radford/bayes-tut.pdf), Zoubin Ghahramni (http://hunch.net/~coms-4771/zoubin_ghahramani_bayesian_learning.pdf),
More informationEM Algorithm II. September 11, 2018
EM Algorithm II September 11, 2018 Review EM 1/27 (Y obs, Y mis ) f (y obs, y mis θ), we observe Y obs but not Y mis Complete-data log likelihood: l C (θ Y obs, Y mis ) = log { f (Y obs, Y mis θ) Observed-data
More informationSTA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning
STA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning Russ Salakhutdinov Department of Statistics! rsalakhu@utstat.toronto.edu! http://www.utstat.utoronto.ca/~rsalakhu/ Sidney Smith Hall, Room 6002 Lecture 7 Approximate
More informationBayesian Inference on Joint Mixture Models for Survival-Longitudinal Data with Multiple Features. Yangxin Huang
Bayesian Inference on Joint Mixture Models for Survival-Longitudinal Data with Multiple Features Yangxin Huang Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, COPH, USF, Tampa, FL yhuang@health.usf.edu January
More informationAn Introduction to mixture models
An Introduction to mixture models by Franck Picard Research Report No. 7 March 2007 Statistics for Systems Biology Group Jouy-en-Josas/Paris/Evry, France http://genome.jouy.inra.fr/ssb/ An introduction
More informationMotivation Scale Mixutres of Normals Finite Gaussian Mixtures Skew-Normal Models. Mixture Models. Econ 690. Purdue University
Econ 690 Purdue University In virtually all of the previous lectures, our models have made use of normality assumptions. From a computational point of view, the reason for this assumption is clear: combined
More informationGenerative Clustering, Topic Modeling, & Bayesian Inference
Generative Clustering, Topic Modeling, & Bayesian Inference INFO-4604, Applied Machine Learning University of Colorado Boulder December 12-14, 2017 Prof. Michael Paul Unsupervised Naïve Bayes Last week
More informationBayesian Learning. HT2015: SC4 Statistical Data Mining and Machine Learning. Maximum Likelihood Principle. The Bayesian Learning Framework
HT5: SC4 Statistical Data Mining and Machine Learning Dino Sejdinovic Department of Statistics Oxford http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~sejdinov/sdmml.html Maximum Likelihood Principle A generative model for
More informationLabel Switching and Its Simple Solutions for Frequentist Mixture Models
Label Switching and Its Simple Solutions for Frequentist Mixture Models Weixin Yao Department of Statistics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66506, U.S.A. wxyao@ksu.edu Abstract The label switching
More informationImage segmentation combining Markov Random Fields and Dirichlet Processes
Image segmentation combining Markov Random Fields and Dirichlet Processes Jessica SODJO IMS, Groupe Signal Image, Talence Encadrants : A. Giremus, J.-F. Giovannelli, F. Caron, N. Dobigeon Jessica SODJO
More informationLecture 16 Deep Neural Generative Models
Lecture 16 Deep Neural Generative Models CMSC 35246: Deep Learning Shubhendu Trivedi & Risi Kondor University of Chicago May 22, 2017 Approach so far: We have considered simple models and then constructed
More informationOptimization. The value x is called a maximizer of f and is written argmax X f. g(λx + (1 λ)y) < λg(x) + (1 λ)g(y) 0 < λ < 1; x, y X.
Optimization Background: Problem: given a function f(x) defined on X, find x such that f(x ) f(x) for all x X. The value x is called a maximizer of f and is written argmax X f. In general, argmax X f may
More informationLasso Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Parametric Models with Singular Information Matrices
Article Lasso Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Parametric Models with Singular Information Matrices Fei Jin 1,2 and Lung-fei Lee 3, * 1 School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics,
More informationRecent Advances in Bayesian Inference Techniques
Recent Advances in Bayesian Inference Techniques Christopher M. Bishop Microsoft Research, Cambridge, U.K. research.microsoft.com/~cmbishop SIAM Conference on Data Mining, April 2004 Abstract Bayesian
More informationContents. Part I: Fundamentals of Bayesian Inference 1
Contents Preface xiii Part I: Fundamentals of Bayesian Inference 1 1 Probability and inference 3 1.1 The three steps of Bayesian data analysis 3 1.2 General notation for statistical inference 4 1.3 Bayesian
More informationNon-Parametric Bayes
Non-Parametric Bayes Mark Schmidt UBC Machine Learning Reading Group January 2016 Current Hot Topics in Machine Learning Bayesian learning includes: Gaussian processes. Approximate inference. Bayesian
More informationA short introduction to INLA and R-INLA
A short introduction to INLA and R-INLA Integrated Nested Laplace Approximation Thomas Opitz, BioSP, INRA Avignon Workshop: Theory and practice of INLA and SPDE November 7, 2018 2/21 Plan for this talk
More informationProbabilistic Time Series Classification
Probabilistic Time Series Classification Y. Cem Sübakan Boğaziçi University 25.06.2013 Y. Cem Sübakan (Boğaziçi University) M.Sc. Thesis Defense 25.06.2013 1 / 54 Problem Statement The goal is to assign
More informationMachine Learning. Gaussian Mixture Models. Zhiyao Duan & Bryan Pardo, Machine Learning: EECS 349 Fall
Machine Learning Gaussian Mixture Models Zhiyao Duan & Bryan Pardo, Machine Learning: EECS 349 Fall 2012 1 The Generative Model POV We think of the data as being generated from some process. We assume
More informationLINEAR MODELS FOR CLASSIFICATION. J. Elder CSE 6390/PSYC 6225 Computational Modeling of Visual Perception
LINEAR MODELS FOR CLASSIFICATION Classification: Problem Statement 2 In regression, we are modeling the relationship between a continuous input variable x and a continuous target variable t. In classification,
More informationNonparametric Bayesian Methods - Lecture I
Nonparametric Bayesian Methods - Lecture I Harry van Zanten Korteweg-de Vries Institute for Mathematics CRiSM Masterclass, April 4-6, 2016 Overview of the lectures I Intro to nonparametric Bayesian statistics
More informationMarkov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)
Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC Dependent Sampling Suppose we wish to sample from a density π, and we can evaluate π as a function but have no means to directly generate a sample. Rejection sampling can
More informationComputationally Efficient Estimation of Multilevel High-Dimensional Latent Variable Models
Computationally Efficient Estimation of Multilevel High-Dimensional Latent Variable Models Tihomir Asparouhov 1, Bengt Muthen 2 Muthen & Muthen 1 UCLA 2 Abstract Multilevel analysis often leads to modeling
More informationLecture 5: Spatial probit models. James P. LeSage University of Toledo Department of Economics Toledo, OH
Lecture 5: Spatial probit models James P. LeSage University of Toledo Department of Economics Toledo, OH 43606 jlesage@spatial-econometrics.com March 2004 1 A Bayesian spatial probit model with individual
More informationLatent factor density regression models
Biometrika (2010), 97, 1, pp. 1 7 C 2010 Biometrika Trust Printed in Great Britain Advance Access publication on 31 July 2010 Latent factor density regression models BY A. BHATTACHARYA, D. PATI, D.B. DUNSON
More informationPerformance Comparison of K-Means and Expectation Maximization with Gaussian Mixture Models for Clustering EE6540 Final Project
Performance Comparison of K-Means and Expectation Maximization with Gaussian Mixture Models for Clustering EE6540 Final Project Devin Cornell & Sushruth Sastry May 2015 1 Abstract In this article, we explore
More informationThe Expectation-Maximization Algorithm
1/29 EM & Latent Variable Models Gaussian Mixture Models EM Theory The Expectation-Maximization Algorithm Mihaela van der Schaar Department of Engineering Science University of Oxford MLE for Latent Variable
More informationBayesian inference for multivariate skew-normal and skew-t distributions
Bayesian inference for multivariate skew-normal and skew-t distributions Brunero Liseo Sapienza Università di Roma Banff, May 2013 Outline Joint research with Antonio Parisi (Roma Tor Vergata) 1. Inferential
More informationParametric fractional imputation for missing data analysis
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Biometrika (????),??,?, pp. 1 15 C???? Biometrika Trust Printed in
More informationOn Reparametrization and the Gibbs Sampler
On Reparametrization and the Gibbs Sampler Jorge Carlos Román Department of Mathematics Vanderbilt University James P. Hobert Department of Statistics University of Florida March 2014 Brett Presnell Department
More informationBayesian nonparametric estimation of finite population quantities in absence of design information on nonsampled units
Bayesian nonparametric estimation of finite population quantities in absence of design information on nonsampled units Sahar Z Zangeneh Robert W. Keener Roderick J.A. Little Abstract In Probability proportional
More informationIntegrated Non-Factorized Variational Inference
Integrated Non-Factorized Variational Inference Shaobo Han, Xuejun Liao and Lawrence Carin Duke University February 27, 2014 S. Han et al. Integrated Non-Factorized Variational Inference February 27, 2014
More informationPENALIZED LIKELIHOOD PARAMETER ESTIMATION FOR ADDITIVE HAZARD MODELS WITH INTERVAL CENSORED DATA
PENALIZED LIKELIHOOD PARAMETER ESTIMATION FOR ADDITIVE HAZARD MODELS WITH INTERVAL CENSORED DATA Kasun Rathnayake ; A/Prof Jun Ma Department of Statistics Faculty of Science and Engineering Macquarie University
More informationPOSTERIOR CONSISTENCY IN CONDITIONAL DENSITY ESTIMATION BY COVARIATE DEPENDENT MIXTURES. By Andriy Norets and Justinas Pelenis
Resubmitted to Econometric Theory POSTERIOR CONSISTENCY IN CONDITIONAL DENSITY ESTIMATION BY COVARIATE DEPENDENT MIXTURES By Andriy Norets and Justinas Pelenis Princeton University and Institute for Advanced
More informationRegularization in Cox Frailty Models
Regularization in Cox Frailty Models Andreas Groll 1, Trevor Hastie 2, Gerhard Tutz 3 1 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich, Department of Mathematics, Theresienstraße 39, 80333 Munich, Germany 2 University
More informationUnsupervised Regressive Learning in High-dimensional Space
Unsupervised Regressive Learning in High-dimensional Space University of Kent ATRC Leicester 31st July, 2018 Outline Data Linkage Analysis High dimensionality and variable screening Variable screening
More informationEstimation in Generalized Linear Models with Heterogeneous Random Effects. Woncheol Jang Johan Lim. May 19, 2004
Estimation in Generalized Linear Models with Heterogeneous Random Effects Woncheol Jang Johan Lim May 19, 2004 Abstract The penalized quasi-likelihood (PQL) approach is the most common estimation procedure
More informationMachine Learning Linear Classification. Prof. Matteo Matteucci
Machine Learning Linear Classification Prof. Matteo Matteucci Recall from the first lecture 2 X R p Regression Y R Continuous Output X R p Y {Ω 0, Ω 1,, Ω K } Classification Discrete Output X R p Y (X)
More informationSTA414/2104. Lecture 11: Gaussian Processes. Department of Statistics
STA414/2104 Lecture 11: Gaussian Processes Department of Statistics www.utstat.utoronto.ca Delivered by Mark Ebden with thanks to Russ Salakhutdinov Outline Gaussian Processes Exam review Course evaluations
More informationGraphical Models for Query-driven Analysis of Multimodal Data
Graphical Models for Query-driven Analysis of Multimodal Data John Fisher Sensing, Learning, & Inference Group Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology
More informationScaling up Bayesian Inference
Scaling up Bayesian Inference David Dunson Departments of Statistical Science, Mathematics & ECE, Duke University May 1, 2017 Outline Motivation & background EP-MCMC amcmc Discussion Motivation & background
More informationσ(a) = a N (x; 0, 1 2 ) dx. σ(a) = Φ(a) =
Until now we have always worked with likelihoods and prior distributions that were conjugate to each other, allowing the computation of the posterior distribution to be done in closed form. Unfortunately,
More informationWeb-based Supplementary Materials for Multilevel Latent Class Models with Dirichlet Mixing Distribution
Biometrics 000, 1 20 DOI: 000 000 0000 Web-based Supplementary Materials for Multilevel Latent Class Models with Dirichlet Mixing Distribution Chong-Zhi Di and Karen Bandeen-Roche *email: cdi@fhcrc.org
More informationThe Jackknife-Like Method for Assessing Uncertainty of Point Estimates for Bayesian Estimation in a Finite Gaussian Mixture Model
Thai Journal of Mathematics : 45 58 Special Issue: Annual Meeting in Mathematics 207 http://thaijmath.in.cmu.ac.th ISSN 686-0209 The Jackknife-Like Method for Assessing Uncertainty of Point Estimates for
More informationLecture 13 : Variational Inference: Mean Field Approximation
10-708: Probabilistic Graphical Models 10-708, Spring 2017 Lecture 13 : Variational Inference: Mean Field Approximation Lecturer: Willie Neiswanger Scribes: Xupeng Tong, Minxing Liu 1 Problem Setup 1.1
More informationBayesian Regularization
Bayesian Regularization Aad van der Vaart Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam International Congress of Mathematicians Hyderabad, August 2010 Contents Introduction Abstract result Gaussian process priors Co-authors
More informationReconstruction of individual patient data for meta analysis via Bayesian approach
Reconstruction of individual patient data for meta analysis via Bayesian approach Yusuke Yamaguchi, Wataru Sakamoto and Shingo Shirahata Graduate School of Engineering Science, Osaka University Masashi
More informationSTATISTICAL INFERENCE WITH DATA AUGMENTATION AND PARAMETER EXPANSION
STATISTICAL INFERENCE WITH arxiv:1512.00847v1 [math.st] 2 Dec 2015 DATA AUGMENTATION AND PARAMETER EXPANSION Yannis G. Yatracos Faculty of Communication and Media Studies Cyprus University of Technology
More informationBayes methods for categorical data. April 25, 2017
Bayes methods for categorical data April 25, 2017 Motivation for joint probability models Increasing interest in high-dimensional data in broad applications Focus may be on prediction, variable selection,
More informationLearning Bayesian network : Given structure and completely observed data
Learning Bayesian network : Given structure and completely observed data Probabilistic Graphical Models Sharif University of Technology Spring 2017 Soleymani Learning problem Target: true distribution
More informationDensity Estimation. Seungjin Choi
Density Estimation Seungjin Choi Department of Computer Science and Engineering Pohang University of Science and Technology 77 Cheongam-ro, Nam-gu, Pohang 37673, Korea seungjin@postech.ac.kr http://mlg.postech.ac.kr/
More informationFitting Multidimensional Latent Variable Models using an Efficient Laplace Approximation
Fitting Multidimensional Latent Variable Models using an Efficient Laplace Approximation Dimitris Rizopoulos Department of Biostatistics, Erasmus University Medical Center, the Netherlands d.rizopoulos@erasmusmc.nl
More informationLecture 10. Announcement. Mixture Models II. Topics of This Lecture. This Lecture: Advanced Machine Learning. Recap: GMMs as Latent Variable Models
Advanced Machine Learning Lecture 10 Mixture Models II 30.11.2015 Bastian Leibe RWTH Aachen http://www.vision.rwth-aachen.de/ Announcement Exercise sheet 2 online Sampling Rejection Sampling Importance
More informationARTICLE IN PRESS. Journal of Multivariate Analysis ( ) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect. Journal of Multivariate Analysis
Journal of Multivariate Analysis ( ) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Multivariate Analysis journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmva Marginal parameterizations of discrete models
More informationInformation geometry for bivariate distribution control
Information geometry for bivariate distribution control C.T.J.Dodson + Hong Wang Mathematics + Control Systems Centre, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology Optimal control of stochastic
More informationDynamic System Identification using HDMR-Bayesian Technique
Dynamic System Identification using HDMR-Bayesian Technique *Shereena O A 1) and Dr. B N Rao 2) 1), 2) Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai 600036, Tamil Nadu, India 1) ce14d020@smail.iitm.ac.in
More informationClustering by Mixture Models. General background on clustering Example method: k-means Mixture model based clustering Model estimation
Clustering by Mixture Models General bacground on clustering Example method: -means Mixture model based clustering Model estimation 1 Clustering A basic tool in data mining/pattern recognition: Divide
More informationHmms with variable dimension structures and extensions
Hmm days/enst/january 21, 2002 1 Hmms with variable dimension structures and extensions Christian P. Robert Université Paris Dauphine www.ceremade.dauphine.fr/ xian Hmm days/enst/january 21, 2002 2 1 Estimating
More informationWeb Appendix for Hierarchical Adaptive Regression Kernels for Regression with Functional Predictors by D. B. Woodard, C. Crainiceanu, and D.
Web Appendix for Hierarchical Adaptive Regression Kernels for Regression with Functional Predictors by D. B. Woodard, C. Crainiceanu, and D. Ruppert A. EMPIRICAL ESTIMATE OF THE KERNEL MIXTURE Here we
More informationBiostat 2065 Analysis of Incomplete Data
Biostat 2065 Analysis of Incomplete Data Gong Tang Dept of Biostatistics University of Pittsburgh October 20, 2005 1. Large-sample inference based on ML Let θ is the MLE, then the large-sample theory implies
More informationFrailty Modeling for Spatially Correlated Survival Data, with Application to Infant Mortality in Minnesota By: Sudipto Banerjee, Mela. P.
Frailty Modeling for Spatially Correlated Survival Data, with Application to Infant Mortality in Minnesota By: Sudipto Banerjee, Melanie M. Wall, Bradley P. Carlin November 24, 2014 Outlines of the talk
More informationThe Expectation Maximization Algorithm
The Expectation Maximization Algorithm Frank Dellaert College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology Technical Report number GIT-GVU-- February Abstract This note represents my attempt at explaining
More informationSTAT 518 Intro Student Presentation
STAT 518 Intro Student Presentation Wen Wei Loh April 11, 2013 Title of paper Radford M. Neal [1999] Bayesian Statistics, 6: 475-501, 1999 What the paper is about Regression and Classification Flexible
More informationGaussian Processes. Le Song. Machine Learning II: Advanced Topics CSE 8803ML, Spring 2012
Gaussian Processes Le Song Machine Learning II: Advanced Topics CSE 8803ML, Spring 01 Pictorial view of embedding distribution Transform the entire distribution to expected features Feature space Feature
More informationBayesian Mixtures of Bernoulli Distributions
Bayesian Mixtures of Bernoulli Distributions Laurens van der Maaten Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of California, San Diego Introduction The mixture of Bernoulli distributions
More informationDifferent points of view for selecting a latent structure model
Different points of view for selecting a latent structure model Gilles Celeux Inria Saclay-Île-de-France, Université Paris-Sud Latent structure models: two different point of views Density estimation LSM
More informationClustering. Professor Ameet Talwalkar. Professor Ameet Talwalkar CS260 Machine Learning Algorithms March 8, / 26
Clustering Professor Ameet Talwalkar Professor Ameet Talwalkar CS26 Machine Learning Algorithms March 8, 217 1 / 26 Outline 1 Administration 2 Review of last lecture 3 Clustering Professor Ameet Talwalkar
More informationModeling conditional distributions with mixture models: Theory and Inference
Modeling conditional distributions with mixture models: Theory and Inference John Geweke University of Iowa, USA Journal of Applied Econometrics Invited Lecture Università di Venezia Italia June 2, 2005
More informationStatistical Data Mining and Machine Learning Hilary Term 2016
Statistical Data Mining and Machine Learning Hilary Term 2016 Dino Sejdinovic Department of Statistics Oxford Slides and other materials available at: http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~sejdinov/sdmml Naïve Bayes
More informationU-Likelihood and U-Updating Algorithms: Statistical Inference in Latent Variable Models
U-Likelihood and U-Updating Algorithms: Statistical Inference in Latent Variable Models Jaemo Sung 1, Sung-Yang Bang 1, Seungjin Choi 1, and Zoubin Ghahramani 2 1 Department of Computer Science, POSTECH,
More informationWEIGHTED QUANTILE REGRESSION THEORY AND ITS APPLICATION. Abstract
Journal of Data Science,17(1). P. 145-160,2019 DOI:10.6339/JDS.201901_17(1).0007 WEIGHTED QUANTILE REGRESSION THEORY AND ITS APPLICATION Wei Xiong *, Maozai Tian 2 1 School of Statistics, University of
More informationDependent hierarchical processes for multi armed bandits
Dependent hierarchical processes for multi armed bandits Federico Camerlenghi University of Bologna, BIDSA & Collegio Carlo Alberto First Italian meeting on Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Torino
More informationNotes on pseudo-marginal methods, variational Bayes and ABC
Notes on pseudo-marginal methods, variational Bayes and ABC Christian Andersson Naesseth October 3, 2016 The Pseudo-Marginal Framework Assume we are interested in sampling from the posterior distribution
More informationBayesian Analysis of Latent Variable Models using Mplus
Bayesian Analysis of Latent Variable Models using Mplus Tihomir Asparouhov and Bengt Muthén Version 2 June 29, 2010 1 1 Introduction In this paper we describe some of the modeling possibilities that are
More informationProbability and Information Theory. Sargur N. Srihari
Probability and Information Theory Sargur N. srihari@cedar.buffalo.edu 1 Topics in Probability and Information Theory Overview 1. Why Probability? 2. Random Variables 3. Probability Distributions 4. Marginal
More informationNon-maximum likelihood estimation and statistical inference for linear and nonlinear mixed models
Optimum Design for Mixed Effects Non-Linear and generalized Linear Models Cambridge, August 9-12, 2011 Non-maximum likelihood estimation and statistical inference for linear and nonlinear mixed models
More informationUNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA CIS 520: Machine Learning Final, Fall 2013
UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA CIS 520: Machine Learning Final, Fall 2013 Exam policy: This exam allows two one-page, two-sided cheat sheets; No other materials. Time: 2 hours. Be sure to write your name and
More informationVariational Approximations for Generalized Linear. Latent Variable Models
1 2 Variational Approximations for Generalized Linear Latent Variable Models 3 4 Francis K.C. Hui 1, David I. Warton 2,3, John T. Ormerod 4,5, Viivi Haapaniemi 6, and Sara Taskinen 6 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
More informationCollapsed Variational Dirichlet Process Mixture Models
Collapsed Variational Dirichlet Process Mixture Models Kenichi Kurihara Dept. of Computer Science Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan kurihara@mi.cs.titech.ac.jp Max Welling Dept. of Computer Science
More informationLecture 2: From Linear Regression to Kalman Filter and Beyond
Lecture 2: From Linear Regression to Kalman Filter and Beyond January 18, 2017 Contents 1 Batch and Recursive Estimation 2 Towards Bayesian Filtering 3 Kalman Filter and Bayesian Filtering and Smoothing
More informationBayesian Nonparametric Models
Bayesian Nonparametric Models David M. Blei Columbia University December 15, 2015 Introduction We have been looking at models that posit latent structure in high dimensional data. We use the posterior
More informationOutline. Clustering. Capturing Unobserved Heterogeneity in the Austrian Labor Market Using Finite Mixtures of Markov Chain Models
Capturing Unobserved Heterogeneity in the Austrian Labor Market Using Finite Mixtures of Markov Chain Models Collaboration with Rudolf Winter-Ebmer, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University
More information. Also, in this case, p i = N1 ) T, (2) where. I γ C N(N 2 2 F + N1 2 Q)
Supplementary information S7 Testing for association at imputed SPs puted SPs Score tests A Score Test needs calculations of the observed data score and information matrix only under the null hypothesis,
More informationCS Lecture 19. Exponential Families & Expectation Propagation
CS 6347 Lecture 19 Exponential Families & Expectation Propagation Discrete State Spaces We have been focusing on the case of MRFs over discrete state spaces Probability distributions over discrete spaces
More informationSmoothness of conditional independence models for discrete data
Smoothness of conditional independence models for discrete data A. Forcina, Dipartimento di Economia, Finanza e Statistica, University of Perugia, Italy December 6, 2010 Abstract We investigate the family
More informationBayesian mixture modeling for spectral density estimation
Bayesian mixture modeling for spectral density estimation Annalisa Cadonna a,, Athanasios Kottas a, Raquel Prado a a Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, University of California at Santa
More information39th Annual ISMS Marketing Science Conference University of Southern California, June 8, 2017
Permuted and IROM Department, McCombs School of Business The University of Texas at Austin 39th Annual ISMS Marketing Science Conference University of Southern California, June 8, 2017 1 / 36 Joint work
More informationPATTERN RECOGNITION AND MACHINE LEARNING CHAPTER 2: PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS
PATTERN RECOGNITION AND MACHINE LEARNING CHAPTER 2: PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTIONS Parametric Distributions Basic building blocks: Need to determine given Representation: or? Recall Curve Fitting Binary Variables
More informationThree Skewed Matrix Variate Distributions
Three Skewed Matrix Variate Distributions ariv:174.531v5 [stat.me] 13 Aug 18 Michael P.B. Gallaugher and Paul D. McNicholas Dept. of Mathematics & Statistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
More information