Resolving conflicts between statistical methods by probability combination: Application to empirical Bayes analyses of genomic data
David R. Bickel

TL;DR
This paper introduces a game-theoretic method for combining statistically plausible distributions without subjective weights, improving robustness in empirical Bayes analyses of genomic data.
Contribution
It proposes a novel distribution combination approach based on a game-theoretic framework that avoids subjective weighting, applicable to diverse statistical methods.
Findings
The method effectively combines conflicting empirical Bayes approaches.
Combined distributions are linear mixes of the most extreme plausible ones.
Weights are balanced to prevent dominance by any single distribution.
Abstract
In the typical analysis of a data set, a single method is selected for statistical reporting even when equally applicable methods yield very different results. Examples of equally applicable methods can correspond to those of different ancillary statistics in frequentist inference and of different prior distributions in Bayesian inference. More broadly, choices are made between parametric and nonparametric methods and between frequentist and Bayesian methods. Rather than choosing a single method, it can be safer, in a game-theoretic sense, to combine those that are equally appropriate in light of the available information. Since methods of combining subjectively assessed probability distributions are not objective enough for that purpose, this paper introduces a method of distribution combination that does not require any assignment of distribution weights. It does so by formalizing a…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
