IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0233019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Bayesian spatial models: Goodness-of-smoothing criteria for assessing under- and over-smoothing

Author

Listed:
  • Earl W Duncan
  • Kerrie L Mengersen

Abstract

Background: Many methods of spatial smoothing have been developed, for both point data as well as areal data. In Bayesian spatial models, this is achieved by purposefully designed prior(s) or smoothing functions which smooth estimates towards a local or global mean. Smoothing is important for several reasons, not least of all because it increases predictive robustness and reduces uncertainty of the estimates. Despite the benefits of smoothing, this attribute is all but ignored when it comes to model selection. Traditional goodness-of-fit measures focus on model fit and model parsimony, but neglect “goodness-of-smoothing”, and are therefore not necessarily good indicators of model performance. Comparing spatial models while taking into account the degree of spatial smoothing is not straightforward because smoothing and model fit can be viewed as opposing goals. Over- and under-smoothing of spatial data are genuine concerns, but have received very little attention in the literature. Methods: This paper demonstrates the problem with spatial model selection based solely on goodness-of-fit by proposing several methods for quantifying the degree of smoothing. Several commonly used spatial models are fit to real data, and subsequently compared using the goodness-of-fit and goodness-of-smoothing statistics. Results: The proposed goodness-of-smoothing statistics show substantial agreement in the task of model selection, and tend to avoid models that over- or under-smooth. Conversely, the traditional goodness-of-fit criteria often don’t agree, and can lead to poor model choice. In particular, the well-known deviance information criterion tended to select under-smoothed models. Conclusions: Some of the goodness-of-smoothing methods may be improved with modifications and better guidelines for their interpretation. However, these proposed goodness-of-smoothing methods offer researchers a solution to spatial model selection which is easy to implement. Moreover, they highlight the danger in relying on goodness-of-fit measures when comparing spatial models.

Suggested Citation

  • Earl W Duncan & Kerrie L Mengersen, 2020. "Comparing Bayesian spatial models: Goodness-of-smoothing criteria for assessing under- and over-smoothing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-28, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233019
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233019
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233019&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0233019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kafadar, Karen, 1994. "Choosing among two-dimensional smoothers in practice," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 419-439, November.
    2. L. Evers & D. A. Molinari & A. W. Bowman & W. R. Jones & M. J. Spence, 2015. "Efficient and automatic methods for flexible regression on spatiotemporal data, with applications to groundwater monitoring," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 431-441, September.
    3. Leonhard Knorr-Held & Günter Raßer, 2000. "Bayesian Detection of Clusters and Discontinuities in Disease Maps," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 13-21, March.
    4. Sturtz, Sibylle & Ligges, Uwe & Gelman, Andrew, 2005. "R2WinBUGS: A Package for Running WinBUGS from R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 12(i03).
    5. Lee, Duncan, 2013. "CARBayes: An R Package for Bayesian Spatial Modeling with Conditional Autoregressive Priors," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 55(i13).
    6. David J. Spiegelhalter & Nicola G. Best & Bradley P. Carlin & Angelika Van Der Linde, 2002. "Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 64(4), pages 583-639, October.
    7. Rodrigues, E.C. & Assunção, R., 2012. "Bayesian spatial models with a mixture neighborhood structure," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 88-102.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nushrat Nazia & Zahid Ahmad Butt & Melanie Lyn Bedard & Wang-Choi Tang & Hibah Sehar & Jane Law, 2022. "Methods Used in the Spatial and Spatiotemporal Analysis of COVID-19 Epidemiology: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-28, July.
    2. Xiao Li & Michele Guindani & Chaan S. Ng & Brian P. Hobbs, 2021. "A Bayesian nonparametric model for textural pattern heterogeneity," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 70(2), pages 459-480, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Douglas R. M. Azevedo & Marcos O. Prates & Dipankar Bandyopadhyay, 2021. "MSPOCK: Alleviating Spatial Confounding in Multivariate Disease Mapping Models," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 26(3), pages 464-491, September.
    2. Liang, Zhongyao & Qian, Song S. & Wu, Sifeng & Chen, Huili & Liu, Yong & Yu, Yanhong & Yi, Xuan, 2019. "Using Bayesian change point model to enhance understanding of the shifting nutrients-phytoplankton relationship," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 393(C), pages 120-126.
    3. Marc Marí-Dell’Olmo & Miguel Ángel Martínez-Beneito, 2015. "A Multilevel Regression Model for Geographical Studies in Sets of Non-Adjacent Cities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-12, August.
    4. Zhao, Qing & Boomer, G. Scott & Silverman, Emily & Fleming, Kathy, 2017. "Accounting for the temporal variation of spatial effect improves inference and projection of population dynamics models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 252-259.
    5. Marco Gramatica & Peter Congdon & Silvia Liverani, 2021. "Bayesian modelling for spatially misaligned health areal data: A multiple membership approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 70(3), pages 645-666, June.
    6. Ferreira, Marco A.R. & Porter, Erica M. & Franck, Christopher T., 2021. "Fast and scalable computations for Gaussian hierarchical models with intrinsic conditional autoregressive spatial random effects," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. repec:jss:jstsof:40:i05 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. I. Gede Nyoman Mindra Jaya & Henk Folmer, 2020. "Bayesian spatiotemporal mapping of relative dengue disease risk in Bandung, Indonesia," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 105-142, January.
    9. Qingfang Liu & Yao Zhao & Sumedha Attanti & Joel L. Voss & Geoffrey Schoenbaum & Thorsten Kahnt, 2024. "Midbrain signaling of identity prediction errors depends on orbitofrontal cortex networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    10. Manuguerra Maurizio & Heller Gillian Z, 2010. "Ordinal Regression Models for Continuous Scales," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, April.
    11. Peng Zhang & Juxin Liu & Jianghu Dong & Jelena L. Holovati & Brenda Letcher & Locksley E. McGann, 2012. "A Bayesian Adjustment for Multiplicative Measurement Errors for a Calibration Problem with Application to a Stem Cell Study," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 268-274, March.
    12. Iain Pardoe & Dean K. Simonton, 2008. "Applying discrete choice models to predict Academy Award winners," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(2), pages 375-394, April.
    13. Abadi, Fitsum & Barbraud, Christophe & Besson, Dominique & Bried, Joël & Crochet, Pierre-André & Delord, Karine & Forcada, Jaume & Grosbois, Vladimir & Phillips, Richard A. & Sagar, Paul & Thompson, P, 2014. "Importance of accounting for phylogenetic dependence in multi-species mark–recapture studies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 273(C), pages 236-241.
    14. Kramer, Michael R. & Cooper, Hannah L. & Drews-Botsch, Carolyn D. & Waller, Lance A. & Hogue, Carol R., 2010. "Metropolitan isolation segregation and Black-White disparities in very preterm birth: A test of mediating pathways and variance explained," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2108-2116, December.
    15. Federico ANDREIS & Pier Alda FERRARI, 2015. "Customer Satisfaction Evaluation Using Multidimensional Item Response Theory Models," Departmental Working Papers 2015-25, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    16. Greves Grow, H. Mollie & Cook, Andrea J. & Arterburn, David E. & Saelens, Brian E. & Drewnowski, Adam & Lozano, Paula, 2010. "Child obesity associated with social disadvantage of children's neighborhoods," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 584-591, August.
    17. Mabel Morales-Otero & Vicente Núñez-Antón, 2021. "Comparing Bayesian Spatial Conditional Overdispersion and the Besag–York–Mollié Models: Application to Infant Mortality Rates," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-33, January.
    18. Congdon, Peter, 2007. "Mixtures of spatial and unstructured effects for spatially discontinuous health outcomes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 3197-3212, March.
    19. Laura A. Hatfield & Steve Gutreuter & Michael A. Boogaard & Bradley P. Carlin, 2011. "Multilevel Empirical Bayes Modeling for Improved Estimation of Toxicant Formulations to Suppress Parasitic Sea Lamprey in the Upper Great Lakes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 1153-1162, September.
    20. Marc K. Francke & Alex Minne, 2017. "The Hierarchical Repeat Sales Model for Granular Commercial Real Estate and Residential Price Indices," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 511-532, November.
    21. Chao Song & Yaqian He & Yanchen Bo & Jinfeng Wang & Zhoupeng Ren & Huibin Yang, 2018. "Risk Assessment and Mapping of Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease at the County Level in Mainland China Using Spatiotemporal Zero-Inflated Bayesian Hierarchical Models," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-16, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0233019. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.