Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods?

Details Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods? Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods?

2009-11-11

arxiv.org/abs/0911.2150v1

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Astrophysics

Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics

9 pages, 8 figures, submitted to mnras

Scientific paper

Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods have revolutionised Bayesian data analysis over the years by making the direct computation of posterior probability densities feasible on modern workstations. However, the calculation of the prior predictive, the Bayesian evidence, has proved to be notoriously difficult with standard techniques. In this work a method is presented that lets one calculate the Bayesian evidence using nothing but the results from standard MCMC algorithms, like Metropolis-Hastings. This new method is compared to other methods like MultiNest, and greatly outperforms the latter in several cases. One of the toy problems considered in this work is the analysis of mock pulsar timing data, as encountered in pulsar timing array projects. This method is expected to be useful as well in other problems in astrophysics, cosmology and particle physics.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods? does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods?, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Bayesian evidence: can we beat MultiNest using traditional MCMC methods? will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-533781