The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach
Open accessAbstract
We wrote this book to introduce graduate students and research workers in various scientific disciplines to the use of information-theoretic approaches in the analysis of empirical data.In its fully developed form, the information-theoretic approach allows inference based on more than one model (including estimates of unconditional precision); in its initial form, it is useful in selecting a "best" model and ranking the remaining models.We believe that often the critical issue in data analysis is the selection of a good approximating model that best represents the inference supported by the data (an estimated "best approximating model").Information theory includes the well-known Kullback-Leibler "distance" between two models (actually, probability distributions), and this represents a fundamental quantity in science.In 1973, Hirotugu Akaike derived an estimator of the (relative) Kullback-Leibler distance based on Fisher's maximized log-likelihood.His measure, now called Akaike 's information criterion (AIC), provided a new paradigm for model selection in the analysis of empirical data.His approach, with a fundamental link to information theory, is relatively simple and easy to use in practice, but little taught in statistics classes and far less understood in the applied sciences than should be the case.We do not accept the notion that there is a simple, "true model" in the biological sciences.Instead, we view modeling as an exercise in the approximation of the explainable information in the empirical data, in the context of the data being a sample from some well-defined population or process.Selection of a best approximating model represents the inference from the data and tells us what "effects" (represented by parameters) can be supported by the data.We focus on Akaike's information criterion (and various extensions) for selection of a parsimonious model as a basis for statistical inference.Later chapters offer formal methods to
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Bayesian Measures of Model Complexity and Fit
Spiegelhalter, D. J., Best, N. G., Carlin, B. P., & Van Der Linde, A. (2002) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00353 · Cited by 151
Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data
Elith*, J., H. Graham*, C., P. Anderson, R., Dudík, M., Ferrier, S., Guisan, A., J. Hijmans, R., Huettmann, F., R. Leathwick, J., Lehmann, A., et al. (2006) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/j.2006.0906-7590.04596.x · Cited by 9,088
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003) · Department of Psychology - University of Koblenz-Landau · doi:10.23668/psycharchives.12784 · Cited by 8,975
Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time
Elith, J., & Leathwick, J. R. (2009) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.110308.120159 · Cited by 6,707
The diversity and biogeography of soil bacterial communities
Fierer, N., & Jackson, R. B. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507535103 · Cited by 5,711
Metadata
- Authors
- Strawderman, R. L., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Statistical Association
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 2000-03
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 449
- Pages
- 341
- ISSN
- 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2077959816
- Cited by
- 4,194
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 241.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2669574
- The paper
- Strawderman, R. L., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2000). Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. Journal of the American Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669574
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.