Pure Poisson model versus gamma-Poisson model #21
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
According to Chapter 12.1.2, a gamma-Poisson model should reduce the impact of high pareto-k points by accounting the difference in rates as gamma-distributed. Hence, highly influential points like Hawaii in the Oceanic tools dataset should not pull the low-contact trend down as much.
I have attempted to replicate Figure 12.2 that accompanies this statement, but I did not get the same result from the models built in numpyro, that the original book author presented. Between Pure Poisson model and gamma-Poisson model, the only observed difference I had was the larger dispersion that is accompanied with using a gamma distribution to estimate the Poisson rate. However, the mean prediction line is similar across both models.