Cited by 1,090Bayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo MethodsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Bayesian Graphical Models for Discrete Data

Madigan, David, York, Jeremy, Allard, Denis·1995·International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique

Abstract

Pendant plus d'un demi-siecle, les graphes ont ete utilises pour representer des modeles statistiques en analyse de donnees. En particulier, les graphes decrivant l'independance conditionnelle sont apparus comme une classe importante de ces modeles. Des applications en analyse d'image, analyse de pedigree, ou encore en systeme expert sont a l'origine de leur developpement, et plusieurs livres de synthese ont deja ete publies a ce sujet. Le developpement d'un cadre Bayesien de ces modeles est en revanche moins connu, et les applications en systemes experts ont motive la recherche dans ce domaine. La possibilite de construire des modeles capables de se remettre a jour au fur et a mesure que de nouvelles donnees sont disponibles est a l'origine d'un interet intense de la part de la communaute travaillant en intelligence artificielle. Cependent, leur application a une classe plus vaste d'analyse de donnees a ete largement negligee. L'objet de cet article est de montrer comment les modeles Bayesiens de graphes permettent d'unifier et de simplifier des problemes standards, tels que les modeles log-lineaires Bayesiens (avec des donnees completes ou non), l'estimation d'une population fermee ou le double echantillonnage. Dans la mesure ou le choix d'un modele conventionel unique echoue dans ce type de situation, nous construisons des distributions a posteriori des quantites d'interet en moyennant sur les modeles possibles. Plus particulierement, nous introduisons la composition de ch…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1403615

Cites

2 of 2 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Madigan, D., York, J., & Allard, D.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Venue
International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1995-08
Volume
63
Issue
2
Pages
215
ISSN
0306-7734 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2330192890
Cited by
1,090
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 65
FWCI
19.56
Type
journal article
Language
fr
Open access
closed
Locations
International Statistical Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Markov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
Bayesian graphical models, conditional independence graphs, missing data, double sampling, posterior distribution, model averaging, Markov chain Monte Carlo, Bayesian networks, expert systems

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