Title of article
Applying Bayesian Model Averaging to mechanistic models: An example and comparison of methods
Author/Authors
J.M. Gibbons a، نويسنده , , *، نويسنده , , G.M. Cox a، نويسنده , , A.T.A. Wood b، نويسنده , , J. Craigon a، نويسنده , , S.J. Ramsden a، نويسنده , , D. Tarsitano a، نويسنده , , N.M.J. Crout، نويسنده ,
Issue Information
ماهنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2008
Pages
13
From page
973
To page
985
Abstract
Model averaging is a group of methods for combining predictions from several models which have the benefit of considering model uncertainty
in addition to parameter uncertainty. The aim of this paper is to introduce these methods in the context of mechanistic model development.
In model averaging predictions are combined, by weighting with factors related to model performance, resulting in ensemble predictions. Bayesian
Model Averaging (BMA) is model averaging in a Bayesian framework where the model weights are Posterior model probabilities (PMPs).
We describe three approximation methods (AIC, BIC and Laplace) for calculating PMPs and to compare with a full Bayesian approach implemented
using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method (MetropoliseHastings). We also describe a simplified BMA approach which is
readily implemented, as it only requires the maximum likelihood parameter estimates and Laplace approximation of the marginal likelihoods.
We illustrate the application of BMA using a mechanistic model for predicting the plant uptake of radiocaesium from contaminated soils (the
‘Absalom Model’). Ten models were selected for averaging, these comprised the full Absalom model and nine reduced models each derived
from the full model. To assess performance model predictions and ensemble predictions were compared using an independent data set. The
PMPs estimated using the MCMC approach and the Laplace approximation were similar and strongly weighted the models with fewer
parameters. The AIC- and BIC-based estimates of the PMPs were correlated but differed considerably from the Laplace and MCMC-based
PMP methods. For our example the simplified BMA approach was performed as well as the full approach. Individual predictions differed among
models and the prediction ensembles resulting from all the approaches captured this uncertainty. We conclude that BMA is a valuable approach,
relevant to mechanistic model development, and suggest a framework for incorporating BMA into model development.
Keywords
Model Averaging , Bayesian model averaging , Model selection , Markov chain Monte Carlo , Mechanistic models , MetropoliseHastings algorithm , Posterior model probability
Journal title
Environmental Modelling and Software
Serial Year
2008
Journal title
Environmental Modelling and Software
Record number
958893
Link To Document