Literature DB >> 10733856

How to Assess a Model's Testability and Identifiability.

.   

Abstract

Formal definitions are given of the following intuitive concepts: (a) A model is quantitatively testable if its predictions are highly precise and narrow. (b) A model is identifiable if the values of its parameters can be ascertained from empirical observations. (c) A model is redundant if the values of some parameters can be deduced from others or if the values of some observables can be deduced from others. Various rules of thumb for nonredundant models are examined. The Counting Rule states that a model is quantitatively testable if and only if it has fewer parameters than observables. This rule can be safely applied only to identifiable models. If a model is unidentifiable, one must apply a generalization of the Counting Rule known as the Jacobian Rule. This rule states that a model is quantitatively testable if and only if the maximum rank (i.e., the number of linearly independent columns) of its Jacobian matrix (i.e., the matrix of partial derivatives of the function that maps parameter values to the predicted values of observables) is smaller than the number of observables. The Identifiability Rule states that a model is identifiable if and only if the maximum rank of its Jacobian matrix equals the number of parameters. The conclusions provided by these rules are only presumptive. To reach definitive conclusions, additional analyses must be performed. To illustrate the foregoing, the quantitative testability and identifiability of linear models and of discrete-state models are analyzed. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.

Year:  2000        PMID: 10733856     DOI: 10.1006/jmps.1999.1275

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Math Psychol        ISSN: 0022-2496            Impact factor:   2.223


  12 in total

1.  The serial-parallel dilemma: a case study in a linkage of theory and method.

Authors:  James T Townsend; Michael J Wenger
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-06

2.  Predicting true patterns of cognitive performance from noisy data.

Authors:  W Todd Maddox; W K Estes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-12

3.  Modeling unidimensional categorization in monkeys.

Authors:  Simon Farrell; Roger Ratcliff; Anil Cherian; Mark Segraves
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  On the Link between Cognitive Diagnostic Models and Knowledge Space Theory.

Authors:  Jürgen Heller; Luca Stefanutti; Pasquale Anselmi; Egidio Robusto
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.500

5.  On the Unidentifiability of the Fixed-Effects 3PL Model.

Authors:  Ernesto San Martín; Jorge González; Francis Tuerlinckx
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 2.500

Review 6.  Extending multinomial processing tree models to measure the relative speed of cognitive processes.

Authors:  Daniel W Heck; Edgar Erdfelder
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

7.  Word frequency of irrelevant speech distractors affects serial recall.

Authors:  Axel Buchner; Edgar Erdfelder
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-01

8.  Estimating cerebral oxygen metabolism from fMRI with a dynamic multicompartment Windkessel model.

Authors:  Theodore J Huppert; Monica S Allen; Solomon G Diamond; David A Boas
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Modeling temporal dynamics of face processing in youth and adults.

Authors:  Caitlin M Hudac; Adam Naples; Trent D DesChamps; Marika C Coffman; Anna Kresse; Tracey Ward; Cora Mukerji; Benjamin Aaronson; Susan Faja; James C McPartland; Raphael Bernier
Journal:  Soc Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 2.381

10.  Revisiting absolute and relative judgments in the WITNESS model.

Authors:  Dustin Fife; Colton Perry; Scott D Gronlund
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.