Pure robust versus robust portfolio unbiased—Credibility and asymptotic optimality

Estimation of several normal means, with emphasis on the normal regression empirical Bayes model, is considered. Within this model, the empirical Bayes estimator is of Stein type. A hierarchical Bayes analysis provides a family of minimax estimators. The performances of the empirical Bayes and hierarchical Bayes estimators are also compared. The shrinkage behavior of those estimators is shown in an application to the two-way classification.

A credibility estimator is Bayes in the restricted class of linear estimators and may be viewed as a linear approximation to the (unrestricted) Bayes estimator. When the structural parameters occurring in a credibility formula are replaced by consistent estimators based on data from a collective of similar risks,we obtain an empirical credibility estimator, which is a credibility counterpart of empirical Bayes estimators. Empirical credibility estimators are proposed under various model assumptions, and sufficient conditions for asymptotic optimality are established.

Assessments of the potential health impacts of contaminants and other environmental risk factors are often based on comparisons of disease rates among collections of spatially aligned areas. These comparisons are valid only if the observed rates adequately reflect the true underlying area‐specific risk. In areas with small populations, observed incidence values can be highly unstable and true risk differences among areas can be masked by spurious fluctuations in the observed rates. We examine the use of Bayes and empirical Bayes methods for stabilizing incidence rates observed in geographically aligned areas. While these methods improve stability, both the Bayes and empirical Bayes approaches produce a histogram of the estimates that is too narrow when compared to the true distribution of risk. Constrained empirical Bayes estimators have been developed that provide improved estimation of the variance of the true rates. We use simulations to compare the performance of Bayes, empirical Bayes, and constrained empirical Bayes approaches for estimating incidence rates in a variety of multivariate Gaussian scenarios with differing levels of spatial dependence. The mean squared error of estimation associated with the simulated observed rates was, on average, five times greater than that of the Bayes and empirical Bayes estimates. The sample variance of the standard Bayes and empirical Bayes estimates was consistently smaller than the variance of the simulated rates. The constrained estimators produced collections of rate estimates that dramatically improved estimation of the true dispersion of risk. In addition, the mean square error of the constrained empirical Bayes estimates was only slightly greater than that of the unconstrained rate estimates. We illustrate the use of empirical and constrained empirical Bayes estimators in an analysis of lung cancer mortality rates in Ohio.

MSE superiority of Bayes and empirical Bayes estimators in two generalized seemingly unrelated regressions

Adaptive nonparametric empirical Bayes estimation via wavelet series: The minimax study

Consider the problem of simultaneous testing for the means of independent normal observations. In this paper, we study some asymptotic optimality properties of certain multiple testing rules induced by a general class of one-group shrinkage priors in a Bayesian decision theoretic framework, where the overall loss is taken as the number of misclassified hypotheses. We assume a two-groups normal mixture model for the data and consider the asymptotic framework adopted in Bogdan et al. (2011) who introduced the notion of asymptotic Bayes optimality under sparsity in the context of multiple testing. The general class of one-group priors under study is rich enough to include, among others, the families of three parameter beta, generalized double Pareto priors, and in particular the horseshoe, the normal–exponential–gamma and the Strawderman–Berger priors. We establish that within our chosen asymptotic framework, the multiple testing rules under study asymptotically attain the risk of the Bayes Oracle up to a multiplicative factor, with the constant in the risk close to the constant in the Oracle risk. This is similar to a result obtained in Datta and Ghosh (2013) for the multiple testing rule based on the horseshoe estimator introduced in Carvalho et al. (2009, 2010). We further show that under very mild assumption on the underlying sparsity parameter, the induced decisions using an empirical Bayes estimate of the corresponding global shrinkage parameter proposed by van der Pas et al. (2014), asymptotically attain the optimal Bayes risk up to the same multiplicative factor. We provide a unifying argument applicable for the general class of priors under study. In the process, we settle a conjecture regarding optimality property of the generalized double Pareto priors made in Datta and Ghosh (2013). Our work also shows that the result in Datta and Ghosh (2013) can be improved further.

Finding a new drug which is both safe and efficient is an expensive and time-consuming endeavour. In particular, establishing the ‘dose-effect relationship’ – how beneficial a drug is at different dosages – can be challenging. Predicting this curve requires gathering experimental data by exposing and recording how cells respond to various levels of the drug. However, extreme values are often observed at low and high dosages, potentially introducing errors that are hard to correct in the prediction process. Yet, these extreme observations are sometimes genuine so researchers cannot just ignore them. To improve dose-effect estimation, Zhou, Liu, Fang et al. developed a new general-purpose approach. It uses advanced statistical modelling to account for extremes in lab data. This strategy outperformed other methods when dealing with these observations while also providing higher efficiency in data analysis with more uniform data in experiments. To facilitate implementation, Zhou, Liu, Fang et al. set up a user-friendly tool baptized ‘REAP’; this free online resource allows scientists without advanced statistical experience to harness the new approach and to perform dose-effect analysis more easily and accurately. This could boost research across many different disciplines that examine the effects of chemicals on cells.

Investigating the effects of the fixed and varying dispersion parameters of Poisson-gamma models on empirical Bayes estimates

In this paper, the Bayes estimator and the parametric empirical Bayes estimator (PEBE) of mean vector in multivariate normal distribution are obtained. The superiority of the PEBE over the minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE) and a revised James-Stein estimators (RJSE) are investigated respectively under mean square error (MSE) criterion. Extensive simulations are conducted to show that performance of the PEBE is optimal among these three estimators under the MSE criterion.

For binomial data analysis, many methods based on empirical Bayes interpretations have been developed, in which a variance‐stabilizing transformation and a normality assumption are usually required. To achieve the greatest model flexibility, we conduct nonparametric Bayesian inference for binomial data and employ a special nonparametric Bayesian prior—the Bernstein–Dirichlet process (BDP)—in the hierarchical Bayes model for the data. The BDP is a special Dirichlet process (DP) mixture based on beta distributions, and the posterior distribution resulting from it has a smooth density defined on [0, 1]. We examine two Markov chain Monte Carlo procedures for simulating from the resulting posterior distribution, and compare their convergence rates and computational efficiency. In contrast to existing results for posterior consistency based on direct observations, the posterior consistency of the BDP, given indirect binomial data, is established. We study shrinkage effects and the robustness of the BDP‐based posterior estimators in comparison with several other empirical and hierarchical Bayes estimators, and we illustrate through examples that the BDP‐based nonparametric Bayesian estimate is more robust to the sample variation and tends to have a smaller estimation error than those based on the DP prior. In certain settings, the new estimator can also beat Stein's estimator, Efron and Morris's limited‐translation estimator, and many other existing empirical Bayes estimators.The Canadian Journal of Statistics40: 328–344; 2012 © 2012 Statistical Society of Canada

Although the conditions for application of the technique of empirical Bayes estimation of the parameter of a distribution may exist, the form of the prior distribution is generally unknown. This often creates major difficultics in the determination of empirical Bayes estimators. The simple device of approximating the prior distribution by a stop function is used to overcome this problem and to obtain smooth empirical Bayes estimators. This paper supplements earlier work by considering continuous distributions and multiple past and current observations. The effectiveness of the proposed smooth empirical Bayes estimators is examined, and the results indicate that they can be substantially better than optimum non-Bayes estimators, even when the amount of past data is small.

The relative 'performances of improved ridge estimators and an empirical Bayes estimator are studied by means of Monte Carlo simulations. The empirical Bayes method is seen to perform consistently better in terms of smaller MSE and more accurate empirical coverage than any of the estimators considered here. A bootstrap method is proposed to obtain more reliable estimates of the MSE of ridge esimators. Some theorems on the bootstrap for the ridge estimators are also given and they are used to provide an analytical understanding of the proposed bootstrap procedure. Empirical coverages of the ridge estimators based on the proposed procedure are generally closer to the nominal coverage when compared to their earlier counterparts. In general, except for a few cases, these coverages are still less accurate than the empirical coverages of the empirical Bayes estimator.

under entropy loss function, the E-Bayes estimation and empirical bayes estimation to the parameter of inverse Weibull distribution used conjugate prior are discussed. And we prove the empirical bayes estimation is asymptotically optimal. At last, the MSE of the estimations are compared based on Monte Carlo simulation study. According to these comparisons, it is suggested that the accuracy of E-Bayes estimation is close to the empirical bayes estimation.

Data on job histories is commonly available from study subjects and worksites, therefore jobs are often used for assigning exposures in historical epidemiological studies. Exposure estimates are often derived by offering jobs as fixed effects in statistical models. An alternative approach would be to offer job as a random effect to obtain empirical Bayes estimates of exposure. This approach is more efficient since it weights exposure estimates according to the within-job and between-job variability and the number of measurements for each job. We assess three models for predicting historical dust exposures of sawmill workers. Models were developed using 407 inhalable dust measurements collected from 58 jobs in four sawmills. The first model incorporated all variables as fixed effects; the second added a random term to account for correlation within workers; and the third offered random terms for worker, job and mill (hierarchical model). Empirical Bayes estimates were used to calculate job-specific exposures from the hierarchical model. The fixed effects and random worker mixed models performed nearly identically because there was low within-worker correlation (r = 0.26). The Bayesian exposure predictions from the hierarchical model were slightly more correlated with the observed mill-job arithmetic means than those from the models where jobs were fixed effects (0.74 versus 0.70). While we observed no large differences in exposure estimates by treating job as a fixed or random effect, treating job as a random effect allowed for job-specific coefficients to be estimated for every job while borrowing strength in the presence of sparse data by assuming that the job means are normally distributed around the group mean. In addition, empirical Bayes job estimates can be used for a posteriori job grouping. The use of this method for retrospective exposure assessment should continue to be examined.

The minimax linear Empirical Bayes estimators for a binomial parameter are obtained, assuming some information about the moments of the prior. The form of these estimates is used to propose a criterion which may be helpful in determining whether Empirical Bayes estimation is Indicated for a given problem.