A comparison of centring parameterisations of Gaussian process-based models for Bayesian computation using MCMC

A comparison of centring parameterisations of Gaussian process-based models for Bayesian... Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms for Bayesian computation for Gaussian process-based models under default parameterisations are slow to converge due to the presence of spatial- and other-induced dependence structures. The main focus of this paper is to study the effect of the assumed spatial correlation structure on the convergence properties of the Gibbs sampler under the default non-centred parameterisation and a rival centred parameterisation (CP), for the mean structure of a general multi-process Gaussian spatial model. Our investigation finds answers to many pertinent, but as yet unanswered, questions on the choice between the two. Assuming the covariance parameters to be known, we compare the exact rates of convergence of the two by varying the strength of the spatial correlation, the level of covariance tapering, the scale of the spatially varying covariates, the number of data points, the number and the structure of block updating of the spatial effects and the amount of smoothness assumed in a Matérn covariance function. We also study the effects of introducing differing levels of geometric anisotropy in the spatial model. The case of unknown variance parameters is investigated using well-known MCMC convergence diagnostics. A simulation study and a real-data example on modelling air pollution levels in London are used for illustrations. A generic pattern emerges that the CP is preferable in the presence of more spatial correlation or more information obtained through, for example, additional data points or by increased covariate variability. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Statistics and Computing Springer Journals

A comparison of centring parameterisations of Gaussian process-based models for Bayesian computation using MCMC

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/a-comparison-of-centring-parameterisations-of-gaussian-process-based-0u0QUeXpOm
Publisher
Springer US
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by The Author(s)
Subject
Statistics; Statistics and Computing/Statistics Programs; Artificial Intelligence (incl. Robotics); Statistical Theory and Methods; Probability and Statistics in Computer Science
ISSN
0960-3174
eISSN
1573-1375
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11222-016-9700-z
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms for Bayesian computation for Gaussian process-based models under default parameterisations are slow to converge due to the presence of spatial- and other-induced dependence structures. The main focus of this paper is to study the effect of the assumed spatial correlation structure on the convergence properties of the Gibbs sampler under the default non-centred parameterisation and a rival centred parameterisation (CP), for the mean structure of a general multi-process Gaussian spatial model. Our investigation finds answers to many pertinent, but as yet unanswered, questions on the choice between the two. Assuming the covariance parameters to be known, we compare the exact rates of convergence of the two by varying the strength of the spatial correlation, the level of covariance tapering, the scale of the spatially varying covariates, the number of data points, the number and the structure of block updating of the spatial effects and the amount of smoothness assumed in a Matérn covariance function. We also study the effects of introducing differing levels of geometric anisotropy in the spatial model. The case of unknown variance parameters is investigated using well-known MCMC convergence diagnostics. A simulation study and a real-data example on modelling air pollution levels in London are used for illustrations. A generic pattern emerges that the CP is preferable in the presence of more spatial correlation or more information obtained through, for example, additional data points or by increased covariate variability.

Journal

Statistics and ComputingSpringer Journals

Published: Sep 14, 2016

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off