Receber por email
← Voltar para o catálogo

pymc

Aprenda modelagem Bayesiana com PyMC, abordando modelos hierárquicos, MCMC (NUTS), inferência variacional e comparação LOO/WAIC para programação probabilística e inferência.

28.9kestrelas
Atualizado há 4 meses

Ver no GitHub ↗ Licença: MIT

Como adicionar

/plugin marketplace add K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills

O comando exato pode variar conforme o repositório. Confira o README no GitHub.

Para o autor da skill

Cole no README do seu repo

Mostra que sua skill está catalogada na Skillteca, gera backlink e tráfego rastreável.

[![Skillteca](https://www.skillteca.com.br/api/badge/pymc/svg)](https://www.skillteca.com.br/skills/pymc)
#ai

Skills relacionadas

Ver todas de Desenvolvimento →

Alerta por categoria

Receba novas skills de Desenvolvimento toda segunda

1 email curto, só com as skills novas de Desenvolvimento. 4 minutos de leitura, sem spam, cancela com 1 clique.

Você confirma o email no primeiro envio. Sem spam. Cancela com 1 clique.

Ler descrição completa

PyMC Bayesian Modeling

Overview

PyMC is a Python library for Bayesian modeling and probabilistic programming. Build, fit, validate, and compare Bayesian models using PyMC's modern API (version 5.x+), including hierarchical models, MCMC sampling (NUTS), variational inference, and model comparison (LOO, WAIC).

When to Use This Skill

This skill should be used when:

  • Building Bayesian models (linear/logistic regression, hierarchical models, time series, etc.)
  • Performing MCMC sampling or variational inference
  • Conducting prior/posterior predictive checks
  • Diagnosing sampling issues (divergences, convergence, ESS)
  • Comparing multiple models using information criteria (LOO, WAIC)
  • Implementing uncertainty quantification through Bayesian methods
  • Working with hierarchical/multilevel data structures
  • Handling missing data or measurement error in a principled way

Standard Bayesian Workflow

Follow this workflow for building and validating Bayesian models:

1. Data Preparation

import pymc as pm
import arviz as az
import numpy as np

# Load and prepare data
X = ...  # Predictors
y = ...  # Outcomes

# Standardize predictors for better sampling
X_mean = X.mean(axis=0)
X_std = X.std(axis=0)
X_scaled = (X - X_mean) / X_std

Key practices:

  • Standardize continuous predictors (improves sampling efficiency)
  • Center outcomes when possible
  • Handle missing data explicitly (treat as parameters)
  • Use named dimensions with coords for clarity

2. Model Building

coords = {
    'predictors': ['var1', 'var2', 'var3'],
    'obs_id': np.arange(len(y))
}

with pm.Model(coords=coords) as model:
    # Priors
    alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=1)
    beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=1, dims='predictors')
    sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1)

    # Linear predictor
    mu = alpha + pm.math.dot(X_scaled, beta)

    # Likelihood
    y_obs = pm.Normal('y_obs', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y, dims='obs_id')

Key practices:

  • Use weakly informative priors (not flat priors)
  • Use HalfNormal or Exponential for scale parameters
  • Use named dimensions (dims) instead of shape when possible
  • Use pm.Data() for values that will be updated for predictions

3. Prior Predictive Check

Always validate priors before fitting:

with model:
    prior_pred = pm.sample_prior_predictive(samples=1000, random_seed=42)

# Visualize
az.plot_ppc(prior_pred, group='prior')

Check:

  • Do prior predictions span reasonable values?
  • Are extreme values plausible given domain knowledge?
  • If priors generate implausible data, adjust and re-check

4. Fit Model

with model:
    # Optional: Quick exploration with ADVI
    # approx = pm.fit(n=20000)

    # Full MCMC inference
    idata = pm.sample(
        draws=2000,
        tune=1000,
        chains=4,
        target_accept=0.9,
        random_seed=42,
        idata_kwargs={'log_likelihood': True}  # For model comparison
    )

Key parameters:

  • draws=2000: Number of samples per chain
  • tune=1000: Warmup samples (discarded)
  • chains=4: Run 4 chains for convergence checking
  • target_accept=0.9: Higher for difficult posteriors (0.95-0.99)
  • Include log_likelihood=True for model comparison

5. Check Diagnostics

Use the diagnostic script:

from scripts.model_diagnostics import check_diagnostics

results = check_diagnostics(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma'])

Check:

  • R-hat < 1.01: Chains have converged
  • ESS > 400: Sufficient effective samples
  • No divergences: NUTS sampled successfully
  • Trace plots: Chains should mix well (fuzzy caterpillar)

If issues arise:

  • Divergences → Increase target_accept=0.95, use non-centered parameterization
  • Low ESS → Sample more draws, reparameterize to reduce correlation
  • High R-hat → Run longer, check for multimodality

6. Posterior Predictive Check

Validate model fit:

with model:
    pm.sample_posterior_predictive(idata, extend_inferencedata=True, random_seed=42)

# Visualize
az.plot_ppc(idata)

Check:

  • Do posterior predictions capture observed data patterns?
  • Are systematic deviations evident (model misspecification)?
  • Consider alternative models if fit is poor

7. Analyze Results

# Summary statistics
print(az.summary(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma']))

# Posterior distributions
az.plot_posterior(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma'])

# Coefficient estimates
az.plot_forest(idata, var_names=['beta'], combined=True)

8. Make Predictions

X_new = ...  # New predictor values
X_new_scaled = (X_new - X_mean) / X_std

with model:
    pm.set_data({'X_scaled': X_new_scaled})
    post_pred = pm.sample_posterior_predictive(
        idata.posterior,
        var_names=['y_obs'],
        random_seed=42
    )

# Extract prediction intervals
y_pred_mean = post_pred.posterior_predictive['y_obs'].mean(dim=['chain', 'draw'])
y_pred_hdi = az.hdi(post_pred.posterior_predictive, var_names=['y_obs'])

Common Model Patterns

Linear Regression

For continuous outcomes with linear relationships:

with pm.Model() as linear_model:
    alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10)
    beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors)
    sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1)

    mu = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta)
    y = pm.Normal('y', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y_obs)

Use template: assets/linear_regression_template.py

Logistic Regression

For binary outcomes:

with pm.Model() as logistic_model:
    alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10)
    beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors)

    logit_p = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta)
    y = pm.Bernoulli('y', logit_p=logit_p, observed=y_obs)

Hierarchical Models

For grouped data (use non-centered parameterization):

with pm.Model(coords={'groups': group_names}) as hierarchical_model:
    # Hyperpriors
    mu_alpha = pm.Normal('mu_alpha', mu=0, sigma=10)
    sigma_alpha = pm.HalfNormal('sigma_alpha', sigma=1)

    # Group-level (non-centered)
    alpha_offset = pm.Normal('alpha_offset', mu=0, sigma=1, dims='groups')
    alpha = pm.Deterministic('alpha', mu_alpha + sigma_alpha * alpha_offset, dims='groups')

    # Observation-level
    mu = alpha[group_idx]
    sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1)
    y = pm.Normal('y', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y_obs)

Use template: assets/hierarchical_model_template.py

Critical: Always use non-centered parameterization for hierarchical models to avoid divergences.

Poisson Regression

For count data:

with pm.Model() as poisson_model:
    alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10)
    beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors)

    log_lambda = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta)
    y = pm.Poisson('y', mu=pm.math.exp(log_lambda), observed=y_obs)

For overdispersed counts, use NegativeBinomial instead.

Time Series

For autoregressive processes:

with pm.Model() as ar_model:
    sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1)
    rho = pm.Normal('rho', mu=0, sigma=0.5, shape=ar_order)
    init_dist = pm.Normal.dist(mu=0, sigma=sigma)

    y = pm.AR('y', rho=rho, sigma=sigma, init_dist=init_dist, observed=y_obs)

Model Comparison

Comparing Models

Use LOO or WAIC for model comparison:

from scripts.model_comparison import compare_models, check_loo_reliability

# Fit models with log_likelihood
models = {
    'Model1': idata1,
    'Model2': idata2,
    'Model3': idata3
}

# Compare using LOO
comparison = compare_models(models, ic='loo')

# Check reliability
check_loo_reliability(models)

Interpretation:

  • Δloo < 2: Models are similar, choose simpler model
  • 2 < Δloo < 4: Weak evidence for better model
  • 4 < Δloo < 10: Moderate evidence
  • Δloo > 10: Strong evidence for better model

**Check Pa

Compartilhar X LinkedIn