Cited by 843Markov Chains and Monte Carlo MethodsStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

Markov chain Monte Carlo method and its application

Brooks, Stephen·1998·Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician)

Abstract

The Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method, as a computer-intensive statistical tool, has enjoyed an enormous upsurge in interest over the last few years. This paper provides a simple, comprehensive and tutorial review of some of the most common areas of research in this field. We begin by discussing how MCMC algorithms can be constructed from standard building-blocks to produce Markov chains with the desired stationary distribution. We also motivate and discuss more complex ideas that have been proposed in the literature, such as continuous time and dimension jumping methods. We discuss some implementational issues associated with MCMC methods. We take a look at the arguments for and against multiple replications, consider how long chains should be run for and how to determine suitable starting points. We also take a look at graphical models and how graphical approaches can be used to simplify MCMC implementation. Finally, we present a couple of examples, which we use as case-studies to highlight some of the points made earlier in the text. In particular, we use a simple changepoint model to illustrate how to tackle a typical Bayesian modelling problem via the MCMC method, before using mixture model problems to provide illustrations of good sampler output and of the implementation of a reversible jump MCMC algorithm

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9884.00117

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brooks, S.
Affiliations
University of Bristol (GB)
Corresponding author
Brooks, Stephen
Venue
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician)
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-03
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
69-100
ISSN
  • 0039-0526 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9884
OpenAlex
W2076092328
Cited by
843
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 33
FWCI
21.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Markov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Keywords
Markov chain Monte Carlo, stationary distribution, chain length, starting point, probabilistic graphical models, change-point models, Bayesian modelling, mixture models, reversible jump MCMC

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