Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

**Xiao-Feng Wang ^{*}**

Department of Quantitative Health Sciences/Biostatistics Section, Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA

- *Corresponding Author:
- Xiao-Feng Wang

Department of Quantitative Health Sciences

Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute

9500 Euclid Avenue/JJN3, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA

**E-mail:**[email protected]

**Received Date:** June 18, 2013; **Accepted Date:** June 20, 2013; **Published Date:** June 25, 2013

**Citation:** Wang XF (2013) Bayesian Nonparametric Regression and Density Estimation Using Integrated Nested Laplace Approximations. J Biomet Biostat 4:e125. doi: 10.4172/2155-6180.1000e125

**Copyright:** © 2013 Wang XF. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

**Visit for more related articles at** Journal of Biometrics & Biostatistics

Nonparametric regression; Density estimation; Approximate Bayesian inference; Integrated nested Laplace approximations; Markov chain Monte Carlo

Structured additive regression models have been extensively used in many fields, such as medicine, public health, and economics. In these models, the response variable y_{i} is assumed to belong to an exponential family and its mean μ_{i} is linked to a structured additive predictor η_{i} through a link function g(.), where

(1)

Here α_{0} is the intercept, α_{k}’s are the linear effects of covariates x_{k}’s, f_{l}(.)’s are unknown functions of the covariates μ_{l}’s and ε_{i}’s is unstructured error term. In Bayesian statistics, the common solution to obtain estimates for the models is the use of Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques. Although it is always possible to implement them in theory, MCMC methods could come with a wide range of issues in practice: parameter samples could be highly correlated, computational time is very long, and estimates may content large Monte Carlo errors, etc.

Approximate Bayesian inference using integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA) is a recently proposed method for solving the structured additive regression models where the latent field of the models is Gaussian [1]. The methodology is particularly useful, when the latent Gaussian model is a Gaussian Markov random field (GMRF) with precision matrix *G* controlled by a few hyperparameters. Denote that *β* is the vector of all unknown regression parameters in the structured additive predictor (1), assigned Gaussian priors; *ξ* is the vector of hyperparameters for which non-Gaussian priors are assigned in the model. In a Bayesian framework, one is to estimate the marginal posterior density

(2)

given data y for each component β_{j} of the Gaussian vector *β*. The key of INLA is to construct a nested approximation of (2). First, the marginal posterior is approximated using

where is the Gaussian approximation to the full conditional distribution of *β* evaluated in the mode *β ^{*}(ξ)* for a given

where the sum is over values of *ξ* with area weights Δ_{q} .

INLA method provides accurate approximations to the posterior marginals of the latent variables which are extremely fast to compute. No samples of the posterior marginal distributions need to be drawn using INLA, so it is a computationally convenient alternative to MCMC. All computations required by the INLA methodology have been efficiently implemented by a *R* package INLA (available on www.r-inla.org). It integrates GMRFLib, a C-based library for fast and exact simulation of GMRF.

Rue et al. [1] demonstrated that INLA can be applied to solve a variety of popular statistical models, which includes generalized linear mixed models, stochastic volatility models, spatial disease mapping, and Log-Gaussian Cox processes. In this paper, we show that two classical nonparametric smoothing problems, nonparametric regression and probability density estimation, can be achieved by using INLA. Simulated examples and *R* functions are demonstrated to illustrate the use of the methods. The future research on the applications of INLA to other complex statistical models is discussed in the paper.

Nonparametric regression is a classical problem in statistics, which does not require to specify a parametric functional form for the relationship between the response *y* and the predictor *x*. We assume a model of the form

where *m(.)* is an unknown smooth function and the errors *ε _{i}*’s are assumed to be independent and identically distributed as

There are several popular techniques to estimate nonparametric regression models, such as, local polynomial regression methods [2], and smoothing spline approaches [3]. Here we examine the use of spline techniques. Smoothing spline is motivated by considering the penalized residual sum of squares as a criterion for the goodness of fit of *m(x)* to the data. It minimizes

where λ is a smoothing parameter to control the trade-off between fit and the penalty . The solution to this minimization problem is a natural cubic spline with knots at the distinct observed values of *X _{i}*.

Wahba [4] showed that the smoothing spline is equivalent to Bayesian estimation with a partially improper prior. *m(x)* has the prior distribution which is the same as the distribution of the stochastic process

where is fixed, and V(x) is the one-fold integrated Wiener process,

Thus, estimating m(x) becomes to seek the solution to the stochastic differential equation

(3)

as a prior over *m*. Note that such a differential equation of order two is the continuous-time version of a second-order random walk. However, the solution of (3) does not have any Markov properties. The precision matrix is dense, hence it is computationally intensive. Lindgren and Rue [5] suggested a Galerkin approximation to *m(x)*, as the solution of (3). To be specific, let *x _{1} < x_{2} < ... <x_{n}* be the set of (unequal-spaced) fixed points, a finite element representation of

for the piecewise linear basis functions ψ* _{i}*’s and random weights w

In order to estimate the smooth function *m(x)*, one needs to determine the joint distribution of the weights w = (w* _{1}*,....,w

The *n× n* symmetric matrix *G* is defined as

where the non-zero elements of row *i* are given by

with *g _{i,i+1} Ξ g_{i+1,i}* and

If we assign as a smoothness prior over *m*, the cubic smoothing spline at *x* coincides with the posterior expectation of *m(x)* give the data, i.e. Therefore, the nonparametric regression problem becomes to fit a latent Gaussian model. It can be accomplished using INLA since w is a GMRF. The implementation of the method needs some extra programming in R to define a userspecified GMRF. A R function called npr.INLA is listed in Appendix. The following simple code is to call the fit using INLA, where “x” and “y” are inputs of numeric vector of predictors and responses, respectively.

R> library (INLA)

R> library (splines)

R> fit1<-npr.INLA (x,y)

The outputs of npr.INLA include a vector of sorted *x* values at which the estimate is computed, a vector of smoothed estimates for the regression at the corresponding x, and two vectors of the corresponding 2.5% and 97.5% credible bands for the regression.

We now show two simulated examples to compare the INLA approach and the conventional cubic smoothing spline regression. Generalized cross-validation method is applied to select the smoothing parameters for smoothing splines. The Bayesian method takes the advantage that the smoothing parameter is automatically determined by the model fitting without any user input. In the first example, *m(x) = 3sin(2.5x) + 2exp(-5x ^{2})*,

**Figure 1:** Simulated examples for nonparametric regression: (a) *m(x) = 3sin(2.5x) + 2exp(−5x ), n = 50,σ = 0.5*; (b) *m(x) = x ^{2/5} − cos(π x), n =100,σ = 0.8.* The estimates (solid lines) with credible bands (dashed lines) using INLA are compared to the estimates (dash-dotted lines) using cubic smoothing spline
regression. The true functions are denoted by the dotted lines.

Nonparametric density estimation can be also implemented using INLA. Brown et al. [6] proposed a “root-unroot” density estimation procedure, which turned density estimation into a nonparametric regression problem. The regression problem was created by binning the original observations into suitable size of bins and applying a mean-matching variance stabilizing root transform to the binned data counts. Then, a wavelet block thresholding regression was used to obtain the density estimate. Here we adopt Brown et al. [6] rootunroot procedure but use a second-order random walk model with INLA for the regression step. The second-order random walk model is particularly suitable for an equi-spaced nonparametric time series regression problem [7]. In addition, there are two advantages to use the Bayesian nonparametric approach. First, we avoid the smoothing parameter selection, where the smoothness of curve is automatically determined by the Bayesian model fitting. Second, it is straightforward to construct credible bounds of a regression curve from INLA output. As a result, constructing credible bands for the probability density function becomes a natural by-product in the density estimation. Let be a random sample from a distribution with the density function f_{x}. The estimation algorithm is summarized as follows.

1. Poissonization. Divide in *T* equal length intervals. Let be the count of observations in each of the intervals.

2. Root Transformation. Apply the mean-matching variance stabilizing root transform,

3. Bayesian Smoothing with INLA. Consider the time series to be the sum of a smooth trend function *m* and a noise component *ε*. Fit a second-order random walk model with INLA for the equi-spaced time series to obtain an posterior mean estimate of *m*, and *α / 2* and *1-α / 2* quantiles,

4. Unroot Transformation and Normalization. The density function *f _{x}* is estimated by

and the *100(1-α )% *credible bands of *f(x)* is

where is a normalization constant.

The R function, density.INLA in Appendix implements the above root-unroot algorithm. The following code is to call the density fit using INLA, where “x” is a numeric vector of data values, “m” is the number of equally spaced points at which the density is to be estimated, “from” and “to” are the left and right-most points of the grid at which the density is to be estimated. If “from” and “to” are missing, “from” equals to the minima of the data values minus “cut” times the range of the data values and “to” equals to the maxima of the data values plus “cut” times the range of the data values.

R> library (INLA)

R> fit1 <-density.INLA (x, m=101, from=min (x), to=max (x), cut=0.1)

**Figure 2** shows the two simulated examples to compare INLA method and conventional kernel density estimation. In the first example data were generated from the standard normal distribution, X ~ N(0,1),with sample size n=500; In the second example data were generated from a normal mixture model, X ~ 0.5N(-1.5,1) + 0.5N(2.5,0.75^{2} ), with sample size *n*=1000. In the figure, the estimates using INLA are denoted by the solid lines, and the 95% credible bands are denoted by the dashed lines. The kernel density estimates with Sheather and Jones [8] plug-in bandwidth are denoted by the dash-dotted lines. The true functions are denoted by the dotted lines. We note that the INLA estimates are very close to the kernel density estimates. The INLA approach allows us to compute the credible bands of the density function without additional computational efforts.

**Figure 2:** Simulated examples for density estimation: (a) *X* ~ *N*(0,1), *n* = 500; (b) *X* ~ 0.5*N*(−1.5,1) + 0.5*N*(2.5,0.75^{2} ), *n* =1000 . The estimates (solid lines) using
INLA are compared to the estimates (dash-dotted lines) using kernel density estimation with Sheather and Jones [8]’s plug-in bandwidth. The true functions
are denoted by the dotted lines.

MCMC techniques were commonly choices to fit structured additive regression models, however they may often suffer the issues of convergence and computational time. INLA approach provides a novel approximate Bayesian inference method to fit a large class of structured additive models with latent Gaussian field. It, as an alternative to MCMC, provides accurate approximations to estimate posterior marginals and avoid time-consuming sampling. INLA method has been implemented in C and a R-interfaced package is available under Linux, Windows and Macintosh. The package provides a user-friendly interface and makes latent Gaussian models applicable in a general way.

We have shown that two classical nonparametric models can be fit through the approximate Bayesian inferential procedure. Nonparametric regression is treated within a general second-order random walk model by assigning appropriate GMRF priors. Density estimation is transformed to an equally-spaced nonparametric Bayesian time series regression problem by adapting Brown et al. [6] root-unroot algorithm. The approximate Bayesian inference of the nonparametric models enjoys the advantage of fast computation, automatic selection of smoothing parameter and construction of credible bands.

Recently, Lindgren et al. [9] have addressed the explicit link between Gaussian fields and Gaussian Markov random fields through the stochastic partial differential equation approach. INLA approach has been applied to a variety of complex models, such as spatialtemporal disease mapping [10], additive mixed quantile regression models [11], and beta semiparametric mixed models [12]. INLA, as new Bayesian computation tools, have a great potential to be used in many scientific fields. There are many open problems of applying INLA to advanced statistical models. For instance, it would be of interest to use INLA for joint modeling of longitudinal and time-to-event data, functional data analysis, measurement error models, and sparse ultrahigh- dimensional modeling. Such problems need further investigation and should be detailed in the future.

We present here the key compute code to call INLA for nonparametric regression and density estimation. Simulation examples and code files can be obtained from the journal’s webpage or http://filer.case.edu/xxw17/Software/npINLA/.

## Nonparametric regression using INLA

npr.INLA <- function(x, y, diagonal = 1e-03, constr = T, ...){

if (any(is.na(x))) stop(‘x’ contains missing values!”)

if (any(is.na(y))) stop(‘y’ contains missing values!”)

if (length(x) != length(y)) stop(‘x’ and ‘y’ have different lengths!”)

y <- y[order(x)]

x <- sort(x)

B <- bs(x, degree = 1, intercept = TRUE)

idx <- 1:length(x)

Q <- Gmatrix(x)

inla.fit <- inla(y ~ B.1 + B.2 + f(idx, model = ‘generic0”, Cmatrix = Q,

diagonal = diagonal, constr = constr, ...) - 1,

data = as.data.frame(list(y = y, idx = idx, B = B)),

control.predictor = list(compute = T))

return(structure(list(x = x, y = inla.fit$summary.linear. predictor[,1],

y.lower = inla.fit$summary.linear.predictor[,3],

y.upper = inla.fit$summary.linear.predictor[,5])))

}

## Density estimation using INLA

density.INLA <- function(x, m = 101, from, to, cut = 0.1,

diagonal = 1e-03, constr = T, ...){

if (any(is.na(x))) stop(‘x’ contains missing values!”)

if (missing(from)) from <- min(x) - cut * diff(range(x))

if (missing(to)) to <- max(x) + cut * diff(range(x))

bins=seq(from, to, length.out = m)

x.bins <- hist(x, breaks = bins, plot=FALSE)

x.bins.root <- sqrt(x.bins$counts+1/4)

idx <- 1:length(x.bins.root)

Q <- Gmatrix(idx)

inla.fit <- inla(x.bins.root ~ f(idx, model = “generic0”, Cmatrix = Q,

diagonal = diagonal, constr = constr),

data = as.data.frame(list(x.bins.root = x.bins.root, idx = idx)),

control.predictor = list(compute = T))

inla.est <- inla.fit$summary.linear.predictor[,1]

inla.lower <- inla.fit$summary.linear.predictor[,3]

inla.upper <- inla.fit$summary.linear.predictor[,5]

SimpsonInt <- function (x, f, subdivisions = 256){

ap <- approx(x, f, n = 2 * subdivisions + 1)

integral <- diff(ap$x)[1] * (ap$y[2 * (1:subdivisions) - 1]

+ 4 * ap$y[2 * (1:subdivisions)] + ap$y[2 * (1:subdivisions) + 1])/3

return(sum(integral))

}

normalized <- SimpsonInt(x.bins$mids, inla.estˆ2)

f <- inla.estˆ2/normalized

f.lower <- inla.lowerˆ2/normalized

f.upper <- inla.upperˆ2/normalized

return(structure(list(x = x.bins$mids, y = f, y.lower= f.lower, y.upper=f.upper)))

}

## Function to compute G matrix

Gmatrix <- function(x, sparse = TRUE){

if (any(is.na(x))) stop(“’x’ contains missing values!”)

x <- sort(x)

n <- length(x)

d <- diff(x)

d <- c(Inf, Inf, d, Inf, Inf)

k <- 3:(n + 2)

g <- (2/((d[k - 1]ˆ2) * (d[k - 2] + d[k - 1]))

+ 2/(d[k - 1]*d[k]) * (1/d[k - 1] + 1/d[k])

+ 2/((d[k]ˆ2) * (d[k] + d[k + 1])))

k <- 4:(n + 2)

g1 <- -2/(d[k - 1]ˆ2) * (1/d[k - 2] + 1/d[k])

k <- 5:(n + 2)

g2 <- 2/(d[k - 2] * d[k - 1] * (d[k - 2]+d[k - 1]))

G <- diag(g)

G[row(G) == col(G) + 1] <- g1

G[col(G) == row(G) + 1] <- g1

G[row(G) == col(G) + 2] <- g2

G[col(G) == row(G) + 2] <- g2

if (sparse == TRUE) G <- as(G, “dgTMatrix”)

return(G)

}

- Rue H, Martino S, Chopin N (2009) Approximate Bayesian inference for latent Gaussian models by using integrated nested Laplace approximations. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 71: 319-392.
- Fan J, Gijbels I (1996) Local Polynomial Regression. Chapman and Hall, London. UK.
- Gu C (2002) Smoothing Spline ANOVA Models. Springer Verlag, New York, USA.
- Wahba G (1978) Improper priors, spline smoothing and the problem of guarding against model errors in regression. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 40: 364-372.
- Lindgren F, Rue H (2008) On the second-order random walk model for irregular locations. Scand Stat Theory Appl 35: 691-700.
- Brown L, Cai T, Zhang R, Zhao L, Zhou H (2010) The root-unroot algorithm for density estimation as implemented via wavelet block thresholding. Probability theory and related fields 146: 401-433.
- Fahrmeir L, Knorr-Held L (2000) Dynamic and semiparametric models. In Smoothing and Regression: Approaches, Computation, and Application (MG Schimek edn), Wiley, New York, USA.
- Sheather SJ, Jones MC (1991) A reliable data-based bandwidth selection method for kernel density estimation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 53: 683-690.
- Lindgren F, Rue H, Lindström J (2011) An explicit link between Gaussian fields and Gaussian markov random fields: the stochastic partial differential equation approach. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 73: 423-498.
- Schrödle B, Held L (2011) Spatio-temporal disease mapping using INLA. Environmetrics 22: 725-734.
- Yue YR, Rue H (2011) Bayesian inference for additive mixed quantile regression models. Comput Stat Data Anal 55: 84-96.
- Wang XF, Li Y (2013) Bayesian inferences for beta semiparametric mixed models to analyze longitudinal neuroimaging data. In Review.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language

- Adomian Decomposition Method
- Algebra
- Algebraic Geometry
- Algorithm
- Analytical Geometry
- Applied Mathematics
- Artificial Intelligence Studies
- Axioms
- Balance Law
- Behaviometrics
- Big Data Analytics
- Big data
- Binary and Non-normal Continuous Data
- Binomial Regression
- Bioinformatics Modeling
- Biometrics
- Biostatistics methods
- Biostatistics: Current Trends
- Clinical Trail
- Cloud Computation
- Combinatorics
- Complex Analysis
- Computational Model
- Computational Sciences
- Computer Science
- Computer-aided design (CAD)
- Convection Diffusion Equations
- Cross-Covariance and Cross-Correlation
- Data Mining Current Research
- Deformations Theory
- Differential Equations
- Differential Transform Method
- Findings on Machine Learning
- Fourier Analysis
- Fuzzy Boundary Value
- Fuzzy Environments
- Fuzzy Quasi-Metric Space
- Genetic Linkage
- Geometry
- Hamilton Mechanics
- Harmonic Analysis
- Homological Algebra
- Homotopical Algebra
- Hypothesis Testing
- Integrated Analysis
- Integration
- Large-scale Survey Data
- Latin Squares
- Lie Algebra
- Lie Superalgebra
- Lie Theory
- Lie Triple Systems
- Loop Algebra
- Mathematical Modeling
- Matrix
- Microarray Studies
- Mixed Initial-boundary Value
- Molecular Modelling
- Multivariate-Normal Model
- Neural Network
- Noether's theorem
- Non rigid Image Registration
- Nonlinear Differential Equations
- Number Theory
- Numerical Solutions
- Operad Theory
- Physical Mathematics
- Quantum Group
- Quantum Mechanics
- Quantum electrodynamics
- Quasi-Group
- Quasilinear Hyperbolic Systems
- Regressions
- Relativity
- Representation theory
- Riemannian Geometry
- Robotics Research
- Robust Method
- Semi Analytical-Solution
- Sensitivity Analysis
- Smooth Complexities
- Soft Computing
- Soft biometrics
- Spatial Gaussian Markov Random Fields
- Statistical Methods
- Studies on Computational Biology
- Super Algebras
- Symmetric Spaces
- Systems Biology
- Theoretical Physics
- Theory of Mathematical Modeling
- Three Dimensional Steady State
- Topologies
- Topology
- mirror symmetry
- vector bundle

- 6th International Conference on
**Biostatistics**and**Bioinformatics**

November 13-14, 2017, Atlanta, USA

- Total views:
**11688** - [From(publication date):

October-2013 - Oct 20, 2017] - Breakdown by view type
- HTML page views :
**7902** - PDF downloads :
**3786**

Peer Reviewed Journals

International Conferences 2017-18