Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32269786›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2020

A comparison of approximate versus exact techniques for Bayesian parameter inference in nonlinear ordinary differential equation models.

Amani A Alahmadi, Jennifer A Flegg, Davis G Cochrane, Christopher C Drovandi, Jonathan M Keith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amani A AlahmadiSchool of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5359-1340
Jennifer A FleggSchool of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8809-726X
Davis G CochraneSchool of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Christopher C DrovandiSchool of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9222-8763
Jonathan M KeithSchool of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9675-3976

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The behaviour of many processes in science and engineering can be accurately described by dynamical system models consisting of a set of ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Often these models have several unknown parameters that are difficult to estimate from experimental data, in which case Bayesian inference can be a useful tool. In principle, exact Bayesian inference using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques is possible; however, in practice, such methods may suffer from slow convergence and poor mixing. To address this problem, several approaches based on approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) have been introduced, including Markov chain Monte Carlo ABC (MCMC ABC) and sequential Monte Carlo ABC (SMC ABC). While the system of ODEs describes the underlying process that generates the data, the observed measurements invariably include errors. In this paper, we argue that several popular ABC approaches fail to adequately model these errors because the acceptance probability depends on the choice of the discrepancy function and the tolerance without any consideration of the error term. We observe that the so-called posterior distributions derived from such methods do not accurately reflect the epistemic uncertainties in parameter values. Moreover, we demonstrate that these methods provide minimal computational advantages over exact Bayesian methods when applied to two ODE epidemiological models with simulated data and one with real data concerning malaria transmission in Afghanistan.

Indexed as

approximate Bayesian computationBayesian inferencecompartmental modelsepidemiology modelsMarkov chain Monte Carloordinary differential equations

Identifiers

PMID32269786
PMCPMC7137938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.