Bayesian Simultaneous Intervals for Small Areas: An Application to Variation in Maps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bayesian inference about small areas is of considerable current interest, and simultaneous intervals for the parameters for the areas are needed because these parameters are correlated. This is not usually pursued because with many areas the problem becomes difficult. We describe a method for finding simultaneous credible intervals for a relatively large number of parameters, each corresponding to a single area. Our method is model based, it uses a hierarchical Bayesian model, and it starts with either the $100(1-\alpha)$\% (e.g., $\alpha=.05$ for 95\%) credible interval or highest posterior density (HPD) interval for each area. As in the construction of the HPD interval, our method is the result of the solution of two simultaneous equations, an equation that accounts for the probability content, $100(1-\alpha)$\% of all the intervals combined, and an equation that contains an optimality condition like the ``equal ordinates'' condition in the HPD interval. We compare our method with one based on a nonparametric method, which as expected under a parametric model, does not perform as well as ours, but is a good competitor. We illustrate our method and compare it with the nonparametric method using an example on disease mapping which utilizes a standard Poisson regression model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.143 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".