Does Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) follow the Likelihood Principle? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)What is an “uninformative prior”? Can we ever have one with truly no information?ABC. How can it avoid the likelihood function?Parameter Estimation for intractable Likelihoods / Alternatives to approximate Bayesian computationDistance metric for Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) regressionApproximate Bayesian computation: where to start from?Simple linear regression using Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC)In what situations would one use Approximate Bayesian Computation instead of Bayesian inference?Using maximum Likelihood regression to get closer to the true posterior when doing Approximate Bayesian Computation : contradiction?Approximate Bayesian Computation for parameters estimation in ODE-based modelApproximate bayesian computation: model selection on nested modelsProof of Approximate / Exact Bayesian Computation

Tips to organize LaTeX presentations for a semester

What would you call this weird metallic apparatus that allows you to lift people?

GDP with Intermediate Production

Would color changing eyes affect vision?

Relating to the President and obstruction, were Mueller's conclusions preordained?

After Sam didn't return home in the end, were he and Al still friends?

Why is std::move not [[nodiscard]] in C++20?

Getting out of while loop on console

Sally's older brother

Why is it faster to reheat something than it is to cook it?

Universal covering space of the real projective line?

What does Turing mean by this statement?

How to write capital alpha?

Is multiple magic items in one inherently imbalanced?

What is the difference between a "ranged attack" and a "ranged weapon attack"?

License to disallow distribution in closed source software, but allow exceptions made by owner?

The test team as an enemy of development? And how can this be avoided?

Why do early math courses focus on the cross sections of a cone and not on other 3D objects?

Does the Black Tentacles spell do damage twice at the start of turn to an already restrained creature?

Special flights

Is openssl rand command cryptographically secure?

Can you force honesty by using the Speak with Dead and Zone of Truth spells together?

Are the endpoints of the domain of a function counted as critical points?

Why are vacuum tubes still used in amateur radios?



Does Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) follow the Likelihood Principle?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)What is an “uninformative prior”? Can we ever have one with truly no information?ABC. How can it avoid the likelihood function?Parameter Estimation for intractable Likelihoods / Alternatives to approximate Bayesian computationDistance metric for Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) regressionApproximate Bayesian computation: where to start from?Simple linear regression using Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC)In what situations would one use Approximate Bayesian Computation instead of Bayesian inference?Using maximum Likelihood regression to get closer to the true posterior when doing Approximate Bayesian Computation : contradiction?Approximate Bayesian Computation for parameters estimation in ODE-based modelApproximate bayesian computation: model selection on nested modelsProof of Approximate / Exact Bayesian Computation



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








6












$begingroup$


I know that ABC is commonly used when the likelihood is intractable, so likelihood principle is not an interest in that case. But, I am curious whether the ABC satisfies the likelihood principle when the likelihood function is tractable. ABC is a generative procedure to sample parameters from posterior, and likelihood principle says that the inference on the parameter should be solely determined by likelihood part ignoring the term of the observation.



I think that if I generate fake samples from a parameter, the generating process is crucially affected by the term of observation, which might be ignored in the likelihood principle.



It's confusing, because I think that the ABC does not follow the likelihood principle, but it is well-known that Bayesian stat follows it.



Am I missing something?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$


















    6












    $begingroup$


    I know that ABC is commonly used when the likelihood is intractable, so likelihood principle is not an interest in that case. But, I am curious whether the ABC satisfies the likelihood principle when the likelihood function is tractable. ABC is a generative procedure to sample parameters from posterior, and likelihood principle says that the inference on the parameter should be solely determined by likelihood part ignoring the term of the observation.



    I think that if I generate fake samples from a parameter, the generating process is crucially affected by the term of observation, which might be ignored in the likelihood principle.



    It's confusing, because I think that the ABC does not follow the likelihood principle, but it is well-known that Bayesian stat follows it.



    Am I missing something?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      6












      6








      6


      1



      $begingroup$


      I know that ABC is commonly used when the likelihood is intractable, so likelihood principle is not an interest in that case. But, I am curious whether the ABC satisfies the likelihood principle when the likelihood function is tractable. ABC is a generative procedure to sample parameters from posterior, and likelihood principle says that the inference on the parameter should be solely determined by likelihood part ignoring the term of the observation.



      I think that if I generate fake samples from a parameter, the generating process is crucially affected by the term of observation, which might be ignored in the likelihood principle.



      It's confusing, because I think that the ABC does not follow the likelihood principle, but it is well-known that Bayesian stat follows it.



      Am I missing something?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      I know that ABC is commonly used when the likelihood is intractable, so likelihood principle is not an interest in that case. But, I am curious whether the ABC satisfies the likelihood principle when the likelihood function is tractable. ABC is a generative procedure to sample parameters from posterior, and likelihood principle says that the inference on the parameter should be solely determined by likelihood part ignoring the term of the observation.



      I think that if I generate fake samples from a parameter, the generating process is crucially affected by the term of observation, which might be ignored in the likelihood principle.



      It's confusing, because I think that the ABC does not follow the likelihood principle, but it is well-known that Bayesian stat follows it.



      Am I missing something?







      bayesian computational-statistics abc






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Apr 2 at 6:37







      Minsuk Shin

















      asked Apr 2 at 6:31









      Minsuk ShinMinsuk Shin

      663




      663




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          The "when the likelihood function is tractable" is somewhat self-defeating, as the reason for using ABC is that it is intractable.



          As for the likelihood principle, ABC is definitely not respecting it, since it requires a simulation of the data from its sampling distribution. It thus uses the frequentist properties of that distribution rather than the likelihood itself. Except in the (unrealistic) limiting case when the tolerance is exactly zero and the distance is based on the sufficient statistic, the ABC thus fails to agree with the likelihood principle.



          In my humble opinion, this is a minor issue when compared with the major problems faced by ABC, unless you can provide an example with dire (There are also exact Bayesian approaches that do not agree with the likelihood principle, witness the Jeffreys or matching priors.)






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
            $endgroup$
            – Minsuk Shin
            Apr 3 at 20:38












          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "65"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f400719%2fdoes-approximate-bayesian-computation-abc-follow-the-likelihood-principle%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          The "when the likelihood function is tractable" is somewhat self-defeating, as the reason for using ABC is that it is intractable.



          As for the likelihood principle, ABC is definitely not respecting it, since it requires a simulation of the data from its sampling distribution. It thus uses the frequentist properties of that distribution rather than the likelihood itself. Except in the (unrealistic) limiting case when the tolerance is exactly zero and the distance is based on the sufficient statistic, the ABC thus fails to agree with the likelihood principle.



          In my humble opinion, this is a minor issue when compared with the major problems faced by ABC, unless you can provide an example with dire (There are also exact Bayesian approaches that do not agree with the likelihood principle, witness the Jeffreys or matching priors.)






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
            $endgroup$
            – Minsuk Shin
            Apr 3 at 20:38
















          2












          $begingroup$

          The "when the likelihood function is tractable" is somewhat self-defeating, as the reason for using ABC is that it is intractable.



          As for the likelihood principle, ABC is definitely not respecting it, since it requires a simulation of the data from its sampling distribution. It thus uses the frequentist properties of that distribution rather than the likelihood itself. Except in the (unrealistic) limiting case when the tolerance is exactly zero and the distance is based on the sufficient statistic, the ABC thus fails to agree with the likelihood principle.



          In my humble opinion, this is a minor issue when compared with the major problems faced by ABC, unless you can provide an example with dire (There are also exact Bayesian approaches that do not agree with the likelihood principle, witness the Jeffreys or matching priors.)






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
            $endgroup$
            – Minsuk Shin
            Apr 3 at 20:38














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          The "when the likelihood function is tractable" is somewhat self-defeating, as the reason for using ABC is that it is intractable.



          As for the likelihood principle, ABC is definitely not respecting it, since it requires a simulation of the data from its sampling distribution. It thus uses the frequentist properties of that distribution rather than the likelihood itself. Except in the (unrealistic) limiting case when the tolerance is exactly zero and the distance is based on the sufficient statistic, the ABC thus fails to agree with the likelihood principle.



          In my humble opinion, this is a minor issue when compared with the major problems faced by ABC, unless you can provide an example with dire (There are also exact Bayesian approaches that do not agree with the likelihood principle, witness the Jeffreys or matching priors.)






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          The "when the likelihood function is tractable" is somewhat self-defeating, as the reason for using ABC is that it is intractable.



          As for the likelihood principle, ABC is definitely not respecting it, since it requires a simulation of the data from its sampling distribution. It thus uses the frequentist properties of that distribution rather than the likelihood itself. Except in the (unrealistic) limiting case when the tolerance is exactly zero and the distance is based on the sufficient statistic, the ABC thus fails to agree with the likelihood principle.



          In my humble opinion, this is a minor issue when compared with the major problems faced by ABC, unless you can provide an example with dire (There are also exact Bayesian approaches that do not agree with the likelihood principle, witness the Jeffreys or matching priors.)







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Apr 2 at 13:18

























          answered Apr 2 at 7:43









          Xi'anXi'an

          59.7k897368




          59.7k897368











          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
            $endgroup$
            – Minsuk Shin
            Apr 3 at 20:38

















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
            $endgroup$
            – Minsuk Shin
            Apr 3 at 20:38
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
          $endgroup$
          – Minsuk Shin
          Apr 3 at 20:38





          $begingroup$
          Thank you for the answer. I totally agree with the point that likelihood principle thing is a minor problem in ABC. I was just curious, and wanted to make sure that I am not missing something. I am not criticizing the usefulness of ABC, and I believe that in many applications with intractable likelihood ABC might be an only option.
          $endgroup$
          – Minsuk Shin
          Apr 3 at 20:38


















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f400719%2fdoes-approximate-bayesian-computation-abc-follow-the-likelihood-principle%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Triangular numbers and gcdProving sum of a set is $0 pmod n$ if $n$ is odd, or $fracn2 pmod n$ if $n$ is even?Is greatest common divisor of two numbers really their smallest linear combination?GCD, LCM RelationshipProve a set of nonnegative integers with greatest common divisor 1 and closed under addition has all but finite many nonnegative integers.all pairs of a and b in an equation containing gcdTriangular Numbers Modulo $k$ - Hit All Values?Understanding the Existence and Uniqueness of the GCDGCD and LCM with logical symbolsThe greatest common divisor of two positive integers less than 100 is equal to 3. Their least common multiple is twelve times one of the integers.Suppose that for all integers $x$, $x|a$ and $x|b$ if and only if $x|c$. Then $c = gcd(a,b)$Which is the gcd of 2 numbers which are multiplied and the result is 600000?

          Ingelân Ynhâld Etymology | Geografy | Skiednis | Polityk en bestjoer | Ekonomy | Demografy | Kultuer | Klimaat | Sjoch ek | Keppelings om utens | Boarnen, noaten en referinsjes Navigaasjemenuwww.gov.ukOffisjele webside fan it regear fan it Feriene KeninkrykOffisjele webside fan it Britske FerkearsburoNederlânsktalige ynformaasje fan it Britske FerkearsburoOffisjele webside fan English Heritage, de organisaasje dy't him ynset foar it behâld fan it Ingelske kultuergoedYnwennertallen fan alle Britske stêden út 'e folkstelling fan 2011Notes en References, op dizze sideEngland

          Հադիս Բովանդակություն Անվանում և նշանակություն | Դասակարգում | Աղբյուրներ | Նավարկման ցանկ