
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>With the advent of high-performance computing, Bayesian methods are increasingly popular tools for the quantification of uncertainty throughout science and industry. Since these methods impact the making of sometimes critical decisions in increasingly complicated contexts, the sensitivity of their posterior conclusions with respect to the underlying models and prior beliefs is a pressing question for which there currently exist positive and negative results. We report new results suggesting that, although Bayesian methods are robust when the number of possible outcomes is finite or when only a finite number of marginals of the data-generating distribution are unknown, they could be generically brittle when applied to continuous systems (and their discretizations) with finite information on the data-generating distribution. If closeness is defined in terms of the total variation metric or the matching of a finite system of generalized moments, then (1) two practitioners who use arbitrarily close models and observe the same (possibly arbitrarily large amount of) data may reach opposite conclusions; and (2) any given prior and model can be slightly perturbed to achieve any desired posterior conclusions. The mechanism causing brittlenss/robustness suggests that learning and robustness are antagonistic requirements and raises the question of a missing stability condition for using Bayesian Inference in a continuous world under finite information.
20 pages, 2 figures. To appear in SIAM Review (Research Spotlights). arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1304.6772
330, uncertainty quantification, Bayesian inference, Probability (math.PR), Bayesian sensitivity analysis, 62A01, 62E20, 62F12, 62F15, 62G20, 62G35, misspecification, Mathematics - Statistics Theory, robustness, Statistics Theory (math.ST), optimal uncertainty quantification, TA, FOS: Mathematics, QA, Mathematics - Probability
330, uncertainty quantification, Bayesian inference, Probability (math.PR), Bayesian sensitivity analysis, 62A01, 62E20, 62F12, 62F15, 62G20, 62G35, misspecification, Mathematics - Statistics Theory, robustness, Statistics Theory (math.ST), optimal uncertainty quantification, TA, FOS: Mathematics, QA, Mathematics - Probability
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 41 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
