Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
2000 character limit reached

Validified Posterior Possibility Functions

Updated 25 November 2025
  • Validified posterior possibility functions are data-dependent measures for prior-free inference that yield exactly calibrated, frequentist-valid uncertainty quantification.
  • They transform likelihood information into possibility contours through inferential models, ensuring confidence-credibility matching with an inner probabilistic approximation.
  • Their computation uses Monte Carlo and variational techniques to achieve asymptotic efficiency and robust applicability across Bayesian and robust frequentist paradigms.

Validified posterior possibility functions are a class of data-dependent mathematical objects used for prior-free statistical inference, constructed to yield exactly calibrated, frequentist-valid uncertainty quantification through possibility measures. They arise as the posterior output from inferential models (IMs), systematically transforming likelihood information via a calibration principle to deliver posterior possibility contours. These validified possibility functions also admit probabilistic inner approximations, yielding “validified posteriors” with exact confidence-credibility matching and asymptotic efficiency. The construction, calibration, and computational realization of these functions make them a central tool in emerging methodologies that bridge Bayesian, fiducial, and robust frequentist paradigms (Martin, 17 Jan 2025, Martin, 25 Mar 2025).

1. Core Definitions and Theoretical Foundations

Let XPθX\sim P_\theta denote data from a model indexed by parameter θΘRd\theta\in\Theta\subseteq\mathbb{R}^d, with likelihood Lx(θ)L_x(\theta). The starting point is the relative likelihood

R(x,θ)=Lx(θ)suptΘLx(t).R(x,\theta) = \frac{L_x(\theta)}{\sup_{t\in\Theta}L_x(t)}.

A validified posterior possibility function, known as the IM contour or plausibility contour, is then defined for each θΘ\theta\in\Theta by

πx(θ)=Pθ{R(X,θ)R(x,θ)}.\pi_x(\theta) = P_\theta\{R(X,\theta)\leq R(x,\theta)\}.

By construction, πx(θ)[0,1]\pi_x(\theta)\in[0,1] for all θ\theta and supθπx(θ)=1\sup_\theta\pi_x(\theta)=1. The associated possibility measure for a set HΘH\subseteq\Theta is

Πx(H)=supθHπx(θ).\Pi_x(H) = \sup_{\theta\in H} \pi_x(\theta).

The defining property is (strong) validity: supθΘPθ{πX(θ)α}αα[0,1].\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}P_\theta\{\pi_X(\theta)\leq\alpha\} \leq \alpha \quad \forall\alpha\in[0,1]. This ensures that, for any fixed α\alpha, the probability under any true θ\theta that πX(θ)\pi_X(\theta) falls below α\alpha is at most α\alpha. As a consequence, the α\alpha-level plausibility region Cx,α={θ:πx(θ)α}C_{x,\alpha} = \{\theta:\pi_x(\theta)\geq\alpha\} satisfies

supθPθ{ΘCX,α}α,\sup_\theta P_\theta\{\Theta\notin C_{X,\alpha}\} \leq \alpha,

i.e., Cx,αC_{x,\alpha} is an honest (1α)(1-\alpha) frequentist confidence region.

2. Credal Set Characterization and Inner Probabilistic Approximation

Associated with any possibility measure Πx\Pi_x is its closed convex credal set: C(Πx)={QProb(Θ):Q(H)Πx(H), H}.\mathcal{C}(\Pi_x) = \{ Q\in\mathrm{Prob}(\Theta): Q(H)\leq\Pi_x(H),\ \forall H\}. For the level sets Cx,α={θ:πx(θ)α}C_{x,\alpha} = \{\theta:\pi_x(\theta)\geq\alpha\}, the equivalence

QC(Πx)    Q(Cx,α)1α αQ \in \mathcal{C}(\Pi_x) \iff Q(C_{x,\alpha}) \geq 1-\alpha\ \forall\alpha

holds. Every QQ in the credal set thus defines (at least) a confidence distribution.

The inner probabilistic approximation QxQ_x^* (“validified posterior,” Editor's term) is the unique QQ^* that saturates the bounds,

Qx(Cx,α)=1αα[0,1].Q_x^*(C_{x,\alpha}) = 1 - \alpha \quad \forall\alpha\in[0,1].

This probability measure is characterized by the mixture representation: Qx()=01Kxα()dα,Q_x^*(\cdot) = \int_{0}^1 K_x^\alpha(\cdot)d\alpha, where each KxαK_x^\alpha is a probability law supported on Cx,α\partial C_{x,\alpha}, the boundary of the α\alpha-cut. Sampling from QxQ_x^* thus involves randomization of the contour level and then uniform sampling on the corresponding contour boundary.

3. Monte Carlo Construction and Practical Computation

In all but trivial models, the contour πx\pi_x and inner approximation QxQ_x^* lack closed-form expressions. Efficient computation proceeds as follows (Martin, 17 Jan 2025, Martin, 25 Mar 2025):

  1. For each α\alpha (typically on a grid), construct a variational family Rxξ()R_x^{\xi}(\cdot) (e.g., Gaussian law centered at the maximum likelihood estimator) with inflation parameter ξ=ξ(x,α)\xi=\xi(x,\alpha) chosen so that Rxξ(Cx,α)1αR_x^{\xi}(C_{x,\alpha})\approx1-\alpha.
  2. Sample AUniform(0,1)A\sim\mathrm{Uniform}(0,1), set ξ=ξ(x,A)\xi=\xi(x,A), and draw θRxξ\theta\sim R_x^{\xi}, conditioning on θ\theta lying on Cx,A\partial C_{x,A}.
  3. Repeat for j=1,,Nj=1,\dots,N to obtain Monte Carlo particles {θj}\{\theta_j\}.
  4. The possibility function is reconstructed by ranking: π^x(θ)=1Nj=1N1{rx(θj)rx(θ)},\hat\pi_x(\theta) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N 1\{ r_x(\theta_j)\leq r_x(\theta) \}, where rxr_x may be (for instance) the QxQ_x^* density estimate or the original likelihood.

This procedure efficiently delivers a sample-based approximation π^x\hat\pi_x that is itself a valid possibility contour, enjoying parallel scalability and rapid convergence as NN\uparrow.

4. Properties, Calibration, and Asymptotic Behavior

Validified posterior possibility functions exhibit several rigorous guarantees:

  • Validity: supθPθ{π^X(θ)α}α+εn+O(N1/2)\sup_{\theta}P_\theta\{\hat\pi_X(\theta)\leq\alpha\} \leq \alpha + \varepsilon_n + O(N^{-1/2}) (with εn0\varepsilon_n\to0 as nn\to\infty).
  • Uniform Approximation: π^xπx=Op(δvar+N1/2)\|\hat\pi_x - \pi_x\|_\infty = O_p(\delta_{\text{var}} + N^{-1/2}), where δvar\delta_{\text{var}} is the variational approximation error, vanishing under regularity.
  • Asymptotic Normality: As nn\to\infty, the IM contour πx\pi_x approaches a multivariate Gaussian possibility contour, and QxQ_x^* becomes asymptotically efficient (i.e., matching Fisher information covariance).

When the statistical model admits a group invariance structure with a right-Haar measure, the constructed QxQ_x^* coincides exactly with the right-Haar prior Bayes posterior and the fiducial distribution (Martin, 25 Mar 2025).

5. Interplay Between Credible Sets and Plausibility Regions

By design, plausibility regions Cx,αC_{x,\alpha} for the IM are also 100(1α)%100(1-\alpha)\% credible sets under the inner approximation QxQ_x^*: Qx{Cx,α}=1α,Pθ{ΘCX,α}=1α.Q_x^*\{C_{x,\alpha}\} = 1 - \alpha, \quad P_\theta\{\Theta\in C_{X,\alpha}\} = 1 - \alpha. This duality means that the same region enjoys simultaneous frequentist and Bayesian (credibility) interpretation, without reliance on a subjective or default prior.

6. Applications and Illustrative Examples

Applied studies showcase the efficiency and honesty of validified posterior possibility functions:

  • In the Behrens-Fisher problem, the IM-based QxQ_x^* posterior achieves empirical coverage rates at the nominal level (e.g., 0.9040.900.904\approx0.90 at 90%90\% coverage), improving on Jeffreys prior Bayes and Welch tt intervals (Martin, 25 Mar 2025).
  • For inference on the bivariate normal correlation coefficient, the QxQ_x^*-based posterior contour closely matches grid-based IM solutions, achieving supψπx(ψ)=1\sup_\psi\pi_x(\psi)=1 and absolute error 0.01\approx0.01 versus baseline (Martin, 17 Jan 2025).
  • Possibilistic approaches to instrumental variable regression allow coherent sensitivity analysis by replacing the exogeneity assumption with a user-defined set AA of admissible violations of instrument validity. Posterior possibility for the treatment effect β\beta is constructed so that if α0A\alpha_0\in A, the resulting interval enjoys type-I error control: for any δ\delta, supβPβ[πW(βA)δ]δ\sup_\beta P_\beta[\pi_W(\beta|A)\leq\delta]\leq\delta (Steiner et al., 20 Nov 2025).

7. Connections, Extensions, and Contemporary Research

Recent work emphasizes that the IM framework unifies and extends Bayesian, fiducial, and confidence-based inference. In group-invariant models, validified posteriors agree exactly with standard Bayes and fiducial benchmarks, while providing stronger frequentist validity. Computational advances using variational families and Monte Carlo enable practically scalable inference for high-dimensional models (Martin, 17 Jan 2025, Martin, 25 Mar 2025).

A plausible implication is that validified posterior possibility functions may serve as a foundational tool for robust prior-free inference, especially in domains requiring exact calibration, model invariance, or sensitivity to subjective modeling assumptions. Ongoing research targets broader classes of models, hybrid imprecise-probabilistic frameworks, and further efficiency improvements in the variational sampling schemes.

Slide Deck Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Whiteboard

Forward Email Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow Topic

Get notified by email when new papers are published related to Validified Posterior Possibility Functions.