Skip Navigation

Biometrika 2004 91(1):1-14; doi:10.1093/biomet/91.1.1
© 2004 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liechty, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Müller, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Bayesian correlation estimation

John C.Liechty1, Merrill W.Liechty2 and Peter Müller3

1 Departments of Marketing and Statistics, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802-3007, U.S.A.jcl12{at}psu.edu 2 LeBow College of Business, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104–2875, U.S.A.merrill{at}drexel.edu 3 Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030-4009, U.S.A.pm{at}mdacc.tmc.edu

We propose prior probability models for variance-covariance matrices in order to address two important issues.First, the models allow a researcher to represent substantive prior information about the strength of correlations among a set of variables. Secondly, even in the absence of such information, the increased flexibility of the models mitigates dependence on strict parametric assumptions in standard prior models. For example, the model allows a posteriori different levels of uncertainty about correlations among different subsets of variables. We achieve this by including a clustering mechanism in the prior probability model. Clustering is with respect to variables and pairs of variables. Our approach leads to shrinkage towards a mixture structure implied by the clustering. We discuss appropriate posterior simulation schemes to implement posterior inference in the proposed models, including the evaluation of normalising constants that are functions of parameters of interest. The normalising constants result from the restriction that the correlation matrix be positive definite. We discuss examples based on simulated data, a stock return dataset and a population genetics dataset.

Key Words: Covariance matrix; Mixture prior; Separation strategy


Received August 2002. Revised March 2003


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.