Split models for contingency tables

Computational Statistics and Data Analysis

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 621-645

  Højsgaard, Søren ^a  

^a DANISH INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Conditional independence; Context specific independence; Graphical model; Log linear model; Markov property; Model selection

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; MARKOV PROCESSES; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; STATISTICAL METHODS;

SPLIT MODELS;

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS;

NUMERICAL MODEL;

EID: 0037471440     PISSN: 01679473     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0167-9473(02)00119-6     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Agresti, A., 1990. Categorial Data Analysis. Wiley, Chichester.
2. Akaike, H., 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control, 19 (6), 716-723.
3. Andersen, L.R., Krebs, J.H., Damgaard, J., 1991. Steno: an expert system for medical diagnosis based on graphical models and model search. J. Appl. Statist. 18, 139-153.
4. Asmussen, S., Edwards, D., 1983. Collapsibility and response variables in contingency tables. Biometrika 3 (70), 567-578.
5. Badsberg, J.H., 1991. A guide to CoCo. Technical Report R 91-43, Aalborg University.
6. Badsberg, J.H., 1995. An environment for graphical models, part III: Xlisp+CoCo-a tool for graphical models. Ph.D. Thesis, Aalborg University.
7. Bishop, Y.M., Fienberg, S.E., Holland, P.W., 1975. Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice 2nd Edition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
8. Boutilier, C., Friedman, N., Goldszmidt, M., Koller, D., 1996. Context-specific independence in bayesian networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. Portland, OR.
9. Breiman, Friedman, Olshen, Stone, 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth International Group, Belmont, CA.
10. Darroch, J.N., Lauritzen, S.L., Speed, T.P., 1980. Markov fields and log-linear interaction models for contingency tables. Ann. Statist. 8 (3), 522-539.
11. Fowlkes, E.B., Freeny, A.E., Landwehr, J.M., 1988. Evaluating logistic models for large contingency tables. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 83, 611-622.
12. Geiger, D., Heckerman, D., 1991. Advances in probabilistic reasoning. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence Conference, Los Angeles.
13. Goodman, L.A., 1970. The multivariate analysis of qualitative data: interactions among multiple classifications. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 65, 226-256.
14. Hansen, J.F., 1980. The clinical diagnosis of ischaemc heart disease due to coronary artery disease. Danish Medical Bulletin. 27, 280-286.
15. Højsgaard, S., 2000. Statistical inference in context specific interaction models for contingency tables. Technical Report 1, Biometry Research Group, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences; Scandinavian J. Statist., submitted for publication.
16. Højsgaard, S., Thiesson, B., 1995. BIFROST-Block recursive models induced from relevant knowledge, observations, and statistical techniques. J. Comput. Statist. Data Anal. 19, 155-175.
17. Lauritzen, S.L., 1996. Graphical Models. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
18. Madigan, D., Raftery, A.E., 1994. Model selection and accounting for model uncertainty in graphical models using Occam's window. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 89, 1535-1546.
19. Schwarz, G., 1978. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann. Statist. 6, 461-464.
20. Teugels, J.L., Horebeek, J.V., 1998. Generalized graphical models for discrete data. Statist. Probab. Lett. 38, 41-47.
21. Tierney, L., 1990. Lisp-Stat. Wiley, New York.
22. Upton, G.J., 1991. The exploratory analysis of survey data using log-linear models. The Statist. 40, 169-182.
23. Wermuth, N., 1976. Model search among multiplicative models. Biometrics 32, 253-263.
24. Wermuth, N., Lauritzen, S.L., 1983. Graphical and recursive models for contingency tables. Biometrika 70, 537-552.