To check the accuracy of Bayesian computations, it is common to use rank-based simulation-based calibration (SBC). However, SBC has drawbacks: The test statistic is somewhat ad-hoc, interactions are difficult to examine, multiple testing is a challenge, and the resulting p-value is not a divergence metric. We propose to replace the marginal rank test with a flexible classification approach that learns test statistics from data. This measure typically has a higher statistical power than the SBC rank test and returns an interpretable divergence measure of miscalibration, computed from classification accuracy. This approach can be used with different data generating processes to address likelihood-free inference or traditional inference methods like Markov chain Monte Carlo or variational inference. We illustrate an automated implementation using neural networks and statistically-inspired features, and validate the method with numerical and real data experiments.

Stacking is a widely used model averaging technique that yields asymptotically optimal prediction among all linear averages. We show that stacking is most effective when the model predictive performance is heterogeneous in inputs, so that we can further improve the stacked mixture with a hierarchical model. With the input-varying yet partially-pooled model weights, hierarchical stacking improves average and conditional predictions. Our Bayesian formulation includes constant-weight (complete-pooling) stacking as a special case. We generalize to incorporate discrete and continuous inputs, other structured priors, and time-series and longitudinal data. We demonstrate on several applied problems.

When working with multimodal Bayesian posterior distributions, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithms can have difficulty moving between modes, and default variational or mode-based approximate inferences will understate posterior uncertainty. And, even if the most important modes can be found, it is difficult to evaluate their relative weights in the posterior. Here we propose an alternative approach, using parallel runs of MCMC, variational, or mode-based inference to hit as many modes or separated regions as possible, and then combining these using importance sampling based Bayesian stacking, a scalable method for constructing a weighted average of distributions so as to maximize cross-validated prediction utility. The result from stacking is not necessarily equivalent, even asymptotically, to fully Bayesian inference, but it serves many of the same goals. Under misspecified models, stacking can give better predictive performance than full Bayesian inference, hence the multimodality can be considered a blessing rather than a curse. We explore with an example where the stacked inference approximates the true data generating process from the misspecified model, an example of inconsistent inference, and non-mixing samplers. We elaborate the practical implantation in the context of latent Dirichlet allocation, Gaussian process regression, hierarchical model, variational inference in horseshoe regression, and neural networks.

Model inference, such as model comparison, model checking, and model selection, is an important part of model development. Leave-one-out cross-validation (LOO) is a general approach for assessing the generalizability of a model, but unfortunately, LOO does not scale well to large datasets. We propose a combination of using approximate inference techniques and probability-proportional-to-size-sampling (PPS) for fast LOO model evaluation for large datasets. We provide both theoretical and empirical results showing good properties for large data.