3rd Rimini Bayesian workshop
I have (recklessly) agreed to take part in a debate at the third Rimini Bayesian econometrics workshop, taking place at the Rimini Center for Economic Analysis next July 1 and 2. The theme of the debate is “The 21st Century Belongs to Bayes”, which sounds a wee too religious to my taste!, and I will argue about this with Russell Davison, both from McGill and GREQAM in Marseilles. I hope this won’t turn into a disaster as I am not particularly gifted at debating and even less at preaching. Here are the preliminary slides I drafted yesterday
recycling slides from my model choice talk as well as from my master course on The Bayesian Choice. The main input at this stage is the insertion of quotes from recent papers by Andrew Gelman and Alan Templeton, as well as from the discussions of the former by José Bernardo, Stephen Senn, and Larry Wasserman. The quotes from Andrew may sound apocryphal but they come from his April Fool 2008 post (and then Bayesian Analysis paper) where he covers some of the anti-Bayesian arguments. My reasoning in pilling in all those quotes is to douse the most standard criticisms from the start, with a tongue-in-cheek attitude since I completely agree with the first quote from Andrew. However, this most likely means that Russell will look elsewhere for arguments against a 21st Bayesian century. I can actually predict with a 87% prior probability that one such argument will be about large dimensional models, which is another standard criticism addressed at the Bayesian methodology.
Related
This entry was posted on June 1, 2009 at 12:28 am and is filed under Statistics, University life with tags Bayesian statistics, econometrics, model choice, Rimini, slides. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
One Response to “3rd Rimini Bayesian workshop”
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
June 11, 2009 at 4:24 pm
The reference to the Templeton paper (first cited on slide 8) is incorrect. The journal was Molecular Ecology, not Molecular Biology. (http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=templeton+ABC&hl=en&lr=&scoring=r&as_ylo=2004)