Cited by 256Statistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceBayesian Methods and Mixture Models

Goodness of prediction fit

AITCHISON, J.·1975·Biometrika

Abstract

Fitting a parametric model or estimating a parametric density function plays an important role in a number of statistical applications. Two widely-used methods, one replacing the unknown parameter by an efficient estimate and so termed estimative and the other using a mixture of the possible density functions and commonly termed predictive, are compared. On a general criterion of closeness of fit based on a discriminating information measure the predictive method is shown to be preferable. Explicit measures of the relative closeness of predictive and estimative fits are obtained for gamma and multinomial models.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biomet/62.3.547

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The posterior predictive distribution maximizes the expected log-likelihood of hypothetical future observations when averaged over the data-generating distribution.

    “It states that the posterior predictive distribution is the distribution (from the set of all possible distributions Q ) that maximizes the log-likelihood of hypothetical future observations when averaged over the data-generating distribution p ( µ, x 1: t +1 ) = p ( µ ) p ( x 1: t +1 | µ ):”

    From Meta-learned models of cognition (2024) · cites this paper as Aitchison (1975)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
AITCHISON, J.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
AITCHISON, J.
Venue
Biometrika
Published
1975
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
547-554
ISSN
  • 0006-3444 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3510
OpenAlex
W2034517627
Cited by
256
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
8.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Biometrika (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Keywords
goodness of fit, parametric density estimation, predictive density, discriminant information, gamma distribution, multinomial distribution, model fitting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review