zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Geometry Search for the term Geometry in any field. Queries are case-independent.
Funct* Wildcard queries are specified by * (e.g. functions, functorial, etc.). Otherwise the search is exact.
"Topological group" Phrases (multi-words) should be set in "straight quotation marks".
au: Bourbaki & ti: Algebra Search for author and title. The and-operator & is default and can be omitted.
Chebyshev | Tschebyscheff The or-operator | allows to search for Chebyshev or Tschebyscheff.
"Quasi* map*" py: 1989 The resulting documents have publication year 1989.
so: Eur* J* Mat* Soc* cc: 14 Search for publications in a particular source with a Mathematics Subject Classification code (cc) in 14.
"Partial diff* eq*" ! elliptic The not-operator ! eliminates all results containing the word elliptic.
dt: b & au: Hilbert The document type is set to books; alternatively: j for journal articles, a for book articles.
py: 2000-2015 cc: (94A | 11T) Number ranges are accepted. Terms can be grouped within (parentheses).
la: chinese Find documents in a given language. ISO 639-1 language codes can also be used.

a & b logic and
a | b logic or
!ab logic not
abc* right wildcard
"ab c" phrase
(ab c) parentheses
any anywhere an internal document identifier
au author, editor ai internal author identifier
ti title la language
so source ab review, abstract
py publication year rv reviewer
cc MSC code ut uncontrolled term
dt document type (j: journal article; b: book; a: book article)
How to be a better Bayesian. (English) Zbl 0869.62006
Summary: Consider an experiment yielding an observable random quantity $X$ whose distribution is indexed by a real parameter $\theta$. Suppose that a statistician is prepared to execute a Bayes procedure in estimating $\theta$ and has quantified available prior information about $\theta$ in his chosen prior distribution $G$. Suppose that before this estimation process is completed, the statistician becomes aware of the outcome $Y$ of a “similar” experiment. We investigate the questions of whether, and when, this additional information can be exploited so as to provide a better estimate of $\theta$ in the “current” experiment. We show that in the traditional empirical Bayes framework and in situations involving exponential families, conjugate priors, and squared error loss, the answer is “essentially always.” An explicit Bayes empirical Bayes (BEB) estimator of $\theta$ is given that is superior to the original Bayes estimator, showing that the statistician has, in these problems, the opportunity to be a “better Bayesian” by combining some relevant empirical findings with the subjective information embodied in the prior $G$. Our results answer a question in a Bayesian context that remains exclusive in the classical, non-Bayesian version of empirical Bayes estimation. In the final section, our BEB estimator is shown to compare favorably to two other BEB estimators suggested in the literature.

62A01Foundations and philosophical topics in statistics
62C12Empirical decision procedures; empirical Bayes procedures
Full Text: DOI