Assessment of Model Fit Sample Clauses

Assessment of Model Fit. There are a variety of methods to assess model fit in Bayesian analysis. These meth- ods can fall into the category of model fit, model comparison, and model checking [96]. In order to compare the fit of models between naive and more informative mod- els, we focus on the deviance information criterion (DIC). As models with increased complexity generally provide a better fit, this Bayesian information criterion adds a penalty for increased model complexity. The DIC estimates the effective number of parameters in a Bayesian hierarchical model in order to appropriately penalize for additional model complexity. pD = D(θ) − Dˆ(θ) = E[D(θ)|y] − D[E(θ)|y] (4.16) DIC = D(θ) + pD = D(θ) + D(θ) − Dˆ(θ) = 2D(θ) − Dˆ(θ) = 2E[D(θ)|y] − D[E(θ)|y] (4.17) The deviance, D(θ), is an overall measure of model fit and is calculated by twice the negative log likelihood of the model. pD is the estimate of the effective number of parameters and represents the model’s complexity. DIC is the difference in twice the posterior mean of the deviance and the deviance evaluated at the posterior mean of the parameters. Generally, if two models differ in DIC by more than 3, the model with the smaller DIC provides a better fit [114]. WinBUGS does not provide an estimate of DIC for models such as those presented in this research. While an estimate of the deviance, D(θ), is provided by XxxXXXX, Dˆ(θ) is not. This can be calculated in R by evaluating the deviance at the posterior mean of the random variables. For this work, we calculate the observed deviance (and hence the observed DIC) based on the observed data likelihood presented in equations 4.13 and 4.14.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Assessment of Model Fit

  • Environmental Assessment and Mitigation Development of a transportation project must comply with applicable environmental laws. The party named in article 1, Responsible Parties, under AGREEMENT is responsible for the following:

  • Assessment Center A promotional candidate may not appeal or dispute the Assessment Center or scoring of the Assessment Center to an administrative or judicial body except for fraud committed by an assessor.

  • Assessment and updates 12.1 Various opportunities are provided to keep you up to date with your child’s progress. You will receive two comprehensive written reports each year and arrangements will be made for at least one interview where you can discuss your child’s development with their teacher. In addition, you can always contact the School to arrange a meeting if you have any concerns or wish to receive an update on progress.

  • Environmental Assessment Buyer shall have the right for a period commencing upon execution of this Agreement by both parties and ending on November 28, 2012, to conduct an environmental assessment of the Assets, at Buyer’s sole risk, liability and expense. Seller shall make available to Buyer, during the environmental assessment period described above, Seller’s historical files regarding prior operations on the Assets, and provide Buyer and its representatives with reasonable access to the Assets to conduct the environmental assessment. Buyer shall provide Seller three (3) days prior written notice of a desired date(s) for such assessment and Seller shall have the right to be present during any assessment and, if any testing is conducted pursuant to Seller’s express prior written consent, Seller may require splitting of all samples. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, Buyer shall not have the right to drill any test, monitor or other xxxxx or to extract samples of any air, soil, water or other substance from the Assets without Seller’s express prior written consent. If Buyer proposes a reasonable request to drill a test well or extract a sample pursuant to a systematic and customary procedure for the assessment of the environmental condition of the Assets and Seller refuses to grant its consent to such a well or sampling, then Buyer shall have the right, for a period of seventy-two (72) hours following notification of Seller’s refusal to consent, to deliver written notice to Seller of Buyer’s election to exclude from this transaction the portion of the Assets affected by such proposed test well or sample, and the Purchase Price shall be adjusted accordingly by the Allocated Value of such portion of the Assets so excluded. Under no circumstances whatsoever shall Seller ever be obligated to grant its consent to any such test xxxxx or sampling proposed by Buyer, and Buyer’s sole and exclusive remedy for any refusal by Seller to grant its consent shall be the limited right contained in the preceding sentence to exclude the affected Assets from the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. If Buyer fails to exercise the right to exclude such Assets by written notice to Seller delivered prior to the expiration of the seventy-two hour period described above, then Buyer shall be conclusively deemed to have waived such right and shall be obligated to purchase the affected Assets without conducting such testing or sampling or any adjustment of the Purchase Price unless otherwise provided in this Agreement.

  • Review of assessment The assessment of the applicable percentage should be subject to annual review or earlier on the basis of a reasonable request for such a review. The process of review shall be in accordance with the procedures for assessing capacity under the Supported Wage System.

  • ASSESSMENT REPORT Within 120 days following the general election held on November 2nd 2003, the returning officer of the munici- pality shall forward, in accordance with section 659.3 of the Act respecting elections and referendums in munici- palities (R.S.Q., c. E-2.2), an assessment report to the Chief Electoral Officer and the Minister setting out relevant ways to improve the trial and addressing, in particular, the following points : — the preparations for the election (choice of the new method of voting, communications plan, etc.) ; — the conduct of the advance poll and the poll ; — the cost of using the electronic voting system : – the cost of adapting election procedures ; – non-recurrent costs likely to be amortized ; – a comparison between the actual polling costs and the estimated polling costs using the new methods of voting and the projected cost of holding the general election on November 2nd 2003 using traditional methods ; — the number and duration of incidents during which voting was stopped, if any ; — the advantages and disadvantages of using the new method of voting ; — the results obtained during the addition of the votes and the correspondence between the number of ballot paper cards issued to the deputy returning officers and the number of ballot paper cards returned used and unused ; — the examination of rejected ballot papers, if it has been completed.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. Each Party shall give positive consideration to accepting the results of conformity assessment procedures of other Parties, even where those procedures differ from its own, provided it is satisfied that those procedures offer an assurance of conformity with applicable technical regulations or standards equivalent to its own procedures.

  • Diagnostic Assessment 6.3.1 Boards shall provide a list of pre-approved assessment tools consistent with their Board improvement plan for student achievement and which is compliant with Ministry of Education PPM (PPM 155: Diagnostic Assessment in Support of Student Learning, date of issue January 7, 2013).

  • Conformity Assessment 1. The Parties recognize that a broad range of mechanisms exists to facilitate the acceptance of conformity assessment procedures and results thereby, including:

  • Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.