Admissible decision rule
You don't need to be Editor-In-Chief to add or edit content to WikiDoc. You can begin to add to or edit text on this WikiDoc page by clicking on the edit button at the top of this page. Next enter or edit the information that you would like to appear here. Once you are done editing, scroll down and click the Save page button at the bottom of the page.
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Phone:617-632-7753
Please Take Over This Page and Apply to be Editor-In-Chief for this topic: There can be one or more than one Editor-In-Chief. You may also apply to be an Associate Editor-In-Chief of one of the subtopics below. Please mail us [2] to indicate your interest in serving either as an Editor-In-Chief of the entire topic or as an Associate Editor-In-Chief for a subtopic. Please be sure to attach your CV and or biographical sketch.
Overview
In classical (frequentist) decision theory, an admissible decision rule is a rule for making a decision that is "better" than any other rule that may compete with it, in a specific sense defined below. Generally speaking, in most decision problems the set of admissible rules is large, even infinite, but as will be seen there are good reasons to favor admissible rules.
Definition
Define sets 
and 
, where 
are the states of nature, 
the possible observations and the actions that may be taken. A decision rule is a function 
, i.e., upon observing 
, we choose to take action 
.
In addition, we define a loss function 
which measures the loss we incur by taking action 
when the true state of nature is 
. Usually we will take this action after observing data , so that the loss will be 
.
It is possible to recast the theory in terms of a utility function, the negative of the loss. However, admissibility is usually defined in terms of a loss function, and we shall follow this convention.
Let 
have cumulative distribution function 
. Define the risk function as the expectation
![R(\theta,\delta)=E^{\mathcal{X}}[{L(\theta,\delta(x))]}.\,\!](/images/math/6/8/8/688c476925a36d16f54ecc779deb41f7.png)
A decision rule 
dominates a decision rule 
if and only if 
for all 
, and the inequality is strict for some .
A decision rule is admissible if and only if no other rule dominates it; otherwise it is inadmissible. An admissible rule should be preferred over an inadmissible rule since for any inadmissible rule there is an admissible rule that performs at least as well for all states of nature and betters it for some.
Bayes rules
Let 
be a probability distribution on the states of nature. From a Bayesian point of view, we would regard it as a prior distribution. That is, it is our believed probability distribution on the states of nature, prior to observing data. For a frequentist, it is merely a function on with no such special interpretation. The Bayes risk of the decision rule with respect to is the expectation
![r(\pi,\delta)=E^\pi[R(\theta,\delta)].\,\!](/images/math/e/1/4/e14f21c1bea9ab9f245c1908f20fd329.png)
If the Bayes risk is finite, we can minimize 
with respect to to obtain 
, a Bayes rule with respect to . There may be more than one Bayes rule. If the Bayes risk is infinite, then no Bayes rule is defined.
Admissible rules and Bayes rules
In the Bayesian approach to decision theory, is considered fixed. Instead of averaging over 
as in the frequentist approach, the Bayesian would average over . Thus, we would be interested in computing for our observed the expected loss
![\rho(\pi,\delta)=E^{\pi} [ L(\theta,\delta(x)) ]. \,\!](/images/math/0/b/e/0be1a53647f4046b1deb648471347c60.png)
Since is considered fixed and known, we can choose to minimize the expected loss for any ; by varying over its range, we can define a function , which is known as a generalized Bayes rule.
A generalized Bayes rule will be the same as some Bayes rule (relative to 
), provided that the Bayes risk is finite. Since more than one decision rule may minimize the expected loss, there may not be a unique generalized Bayes rule.
According to the complete class theorems, under mild conditions every admissible rule is a (generalized) Bayes rule (with respect to some, possibly improper, prior). Thus, in frequentist decision theory it is sufficient to consider only (generalized) Bayes rules.
While Bayes rules with respect to proper priors are virtually always admissible, generalized Bayes rules corresponding to improper priors need not yield admissible procedures. Stein's example is one such famous situation.
References
- James O. Berger Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis. Second Edition. Springer-Verlag, 1980, 1985. ISBN 0-387-96098-8.
- Morris De Groot Optimal Statistical Decisions. Wiley Classics Library. 2004. (Originally published 1970.) ISBN 0-471-68029-X.
- Christian P. Robert The Bayesian Choice. Springer-Verlag 1994. ISBN 3-540-94296-3.
Acknowledgement and Attribution Regarding Sources of Content
Some of the initial content on this page may be incorporated in part from copyleft sources in the public domain including wikis such as Wikipedia and AskDrWiki. Drug information for patients came from the The National Library of Medicine. Infectious disease information may have come from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Differential Diagnoses are drawn from clinicians as well as an amalgamation of 3 sources: 1.The Disease Database; 2. Kahan, Scott, Smith, Ellen G. In A Page: Signs and Symptoms. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2004:3; 3. Sailer, Christian, Wasner, Susanne. Differential Diagnosis Pocket. Hermosa Beach, CA: Borm Bruckmeir Publishing LLC, 2002:7 .
