ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2202.02923
26
3

Bayesian calibration of simulation models: A tutorial and an Australian smoking behaviour model

7 February 2022
S. Wade
M. Weber
Peter Sarich
P. Vaneckova
Silvia Behar-Harpaz
Preson J Ngo
S. Cressman
C. Gartner
J. Murray
T. Blakely
Melbourne
National Centre for Epidemiology
Canberra
St. Catharines
    CML
ArXivPDFHTML
Abstract

Simulation models of epidemiological, biological, ecological, and environmental processes are increasingly being calibrated using Bayesian statistics. The Bayesian approach provides simple rules to synthesise multiple data sources and to calculate uncertainty in model output due to uncertainty in the calibration data. As the number of tutorials and studies published grow, the solutions to common difficulties in Bayesian calibration across these fields have become more apparent, and a step-by-step process for successful calibration across all these fields is emerging. We provide a statement of the key steps in a Bayesian calibration, and we outline analyses and approaches to each step that have emerged from one or more of these applied sciences. Thus we present a synthesis of Bayesian calibration methodologies that cut across a number of scientific disciplines. To demonstrate these steps and to provide further detail on the computations involved in Bayesian calibration, we calibrated a compartmental model of tobacco smoking behaviour in Australia. We found that the proportion of a birth cohort estimated to take up smoking before they reach age 20 years in 2016 was at its lowest value since the early 20th century, and that quit rates were at their highest. As a novel outcome, we quantified the rate that ex-smokers switched to reporting as a ñever smoker' when surveyed later in life; a phenomenon that, to our knowledge, has never been quantified using cross-sectional survey data.

View on arXiv
Comments on this paper