Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add gamma regression #25

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Add gamma regression #25

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

n-kall
Copy link
Owner

@n-kall n-kall commented Sep 13, 2024

WIP

Comment on lines +13 to +18
$$
\begin{align}
y_i \sim \text{gamma}(s, \alpha/exp(\eta)) \\
\eta_i = \alpha + \beta \cdot x_i
\end{align}
$$
Copy link
Collaborator

@aloctavodia aloctavodia Sep 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Gamma distribution can be a tricky one given the different parameterizations.
In PyMC/Bambi/PreliZ we have (alpha, beta) and (mu, sigma) see here for details https://preliz.readthedocs.io/en/latest/examples/gallery/gamma.html

Usually, we use the mu, sigma parametrization like this

\begin{align}
y_i \sim \text{gamma}(\text{mu}=\mu_i, \text{sigma}=\frac{\mu_i}{\alpha^{0.5}}) \
\mu_i = \exp(\eta_i)\
\eta_i = \beta_0 + \beta_1 \cdot x_i
\end{align}

In brms, I think we have (mu, alpha) and Stan use (alpha, beta) [the same as the PyMC's default]

Copy link
Owner Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, there are clear typos here too. However the issue of different parameterizations is something we will run into in various places, also when recommending priors (e.g. exponential prior). I will open an issue about handling different parametrisations in general

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants