Log in

Approximate Bayesian Techniques for Statistical Model Selection and Quantifying Model Uncertainty—Application to a Gait Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Frequently, biomedical researchers need to choose between multiple candidate statistical models. Several techniques exist to facilitate statistical model selection including adjusted R2, hypothesis testing and p-values, and information criteria among others. One particularly useful approach that has been slow to permeate the biomedical literature is the notion of posterior model probabilities. A major advantage of posterior model probabilities is that they quantify uncertainty in model selection by providing a direct, probabilistic comparison among competing models as to which is the “true” model that generated the observed data. Additionally, posterior model probabilities can be used to compute posterior inclusion probabilities which quantify the probability that individual predictors in a model are associated with the outcome in the context of all models considered given the observed data. Posterior model probabilities are typically derived from Bayesian statistical approaches which require specialized training to implement, but in this paper we describe an easy-to-compute version of posterior model probabilities and inclusion probabilities that rely on the readily-available Bayesian information criterion. We illustrate the utility of posterior model probabilities and inclusion probabilities by re-analyzing data from a published gait study investigating factors that predict required coefficient of friction between the shoe sole and floor while walking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arena, S. L., M. A. Nussbaum, and M. L. Madigan. Required friction during overground walking is lower among obese compared to non-obese older men, but does not differ with obesity among women. Appl. Ergon. 62:77–82, 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Barbieri, M. M., and J. O. Berger. Optimal predictive model selection. Ann. Stat. 32:870–897, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger, J. The case for objective Bayesian analysis. Bayesian Anal. 1:385–402, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Berger, J. Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis, 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 1985.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Berger, J. O., and L. R. Pericchi. The intrinsic Bayes factor for model selection and prediction. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 91:109–122, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Box, G. E. P., and R. D. Meyer. Finding the active factors in fractionated screening experiments. J. Qual. Technol. 25:94–105, 1993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chipman H., E. I. George and R. E. McCulloch. The Practical Implementation of Bayesian Model Selection. In: Model selection. Beachwood: Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2001, pp. 65–116.

  8. Fouskakis, D., I. Ntzoufras, and D. Draper. Bayesian variable selection using cost-adjusted BIC, with application to cost-effective measurement of quality of health care. Ann. Appl. Stat. 3:663–690, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Franck, C. T., and R. B. Gramacy. Assessing Bayes factor surfaces using interactive visualization and computer surrogate modeling. Am. Stat. 74:359–369, 2020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoeting, J. A., D. Madigan, A. E. Raftery, and C. T. Volinsky. Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial. Stat. Sci. 14:382–417, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hoff, P. D. A First Course in Bayesian Statistical Methods. New York: Springer, 2009.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Kass, R. E., and A. E. Raftery. Bayes factors. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90:773–795, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kass, R. E., and L. Wasserman. A reference Bayesian test for nested hypotheses and its relationship to the Schwarz criterion. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90:928–934, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Li, Y., and M. A. Clyde. Mixtures of g-priors in generalized linear models. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 113:1828–1845, 2018.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Liang, F., R. Paulo, G. Molina, M. A. Clyde, and J. O. Berger. Mixtures of g priors for Bayesian variable selection. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 103:410–423, 2008.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Muller, S., J. L. Scealy, and A. H. Welsh. Model selection in linear mixed models. Stat. Sci. 28:135–167, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Hagan, A. Fractional Bayes factors for model comparison. J. R. Stat. Soc. Series B. 57:99–138, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. O’Hagan, A., C. E. Buck, A. Daneshkhah, J. R. Eiser, P. H. Garthwaite, D. J. Jenkinson, J. E. Oakley, and T. Rakow. Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Experts’ Probabilities. Chichester: Wiley, 2006.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Redfern, M. S., R. Cham, K. Gielo-Perczak, R. Grönqvist, M. Hirvonen, H. Lanshammar, M. Marpet, C. Y. Pai, and C. Powers. Biomechanics of slips. Ergonomics. 44:1138–1166, 2001.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwarz, G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann. Stat. 6:461–464, 1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Scott, J. G., and J. O. Berger. Bayes and empirical-Bayes multiplicity adjustment in the variable-selection problem. Ann. Stat. 38:2587–2619, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Team R. C. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wu, C. F. J., and M. S. Hamada. Experiments: Planning, Analysis, and Optimization. Chichester: Wiley, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yao, Y., A. Vehtari, D. Simpson, and A. Gelman. Using Stacking to Average Bayesian Predictive Distributions (with Discussion). Bayesian Analysis. 13:917–1007, 2018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher T. Franck.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

Additional information

Associate Editor Stefan M. Duma oversaw the review of this article.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Franck, C.T., Arena, S.L. & Madigan, M.L. Approximate Bayesian Techniques for Statistical Model Selection and Quantifying Model Uncertainty—Application to a Gait Study. Ann Biomed Eng 51, 422–429 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-022-03046-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-022-03046-4

Keywords

Navigation