2023arXiv (Cornell University)Open access

Are Information criteria good enough to choose the right the number of regimes in Hidden Markov Models?

Bouchra Nasri, Bruno Rémillard, Mamadou Yamar Thioub

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Selecting the number of regimes in Hidden Markov models is an important problem. There are many criteria that are used to select this number, such as Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), integrated completed likelihood (ICL), deviance information criterion (DIC), and Watanabe-Akaike information criterion (WAIC), to name a few. In this article, we introduced goodness-of-fit tests for general Hidden Markov models with covariates, where the distribution of the observations is arbitrary, i.e., continuous, discrete, or a mixture of both. Then, a selection procedure is proposed based on this goodness-of-fit test. The main aim of this article is to compare the classical information criterion with the new criterion, when the outcome is either continuous, discrete or zero-inflated. Numerical experiments assess the finite sample performance of the goodness-of-fit tests, and comparisons between the different criteria are made.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Selecting the number of regimes in Hidden Markov models is an important problem. There are many criteria that are used to select this number, such as Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), integrated completed likelihood (ICL), deviance information criterion (DIC), and Watanabe-Akaike information criterion (WAIC), to name a few. In this article, we introduced goodness-of-fit tests for general Hidden Markov models with covariates, where the distribution of the observations is arbitrary, i.e., continuous, discrete, or a mixture of both. Then, a selection procedure is proposed based on this goodness-of-fit test. The main aim of this article is to compare the classical information criterion with the new criterion, when the outcome is either continuous, discrete or zero-inflated. Numerical experiments assess the finite sample performance of the goodness-of-fit tests, and comparisons between the different criteria are made.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Selecting the number of regimes in Hidden Markov models is an important problem. There are many criteria that are used to select this number, such as Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), integrated completed likelihood (ICL), deviance information criterion (DIC), and Watanabe-Akaike information criterion (WAIC), to name a few. In this article, we introduced goodness-of-fit tests for general Hidden Markov models with covariates, where the distribution of the observations is arbitrary, i.e., continuous, discrete, or a mixture of both. Then, a selection procedure is proposed based on this goodness-of-fit test. The main aim of this article is to compare the classical information criterion with the new criterion, when the outcome is either continuous, discrete or zero-inflated. Numerical experiments assess the finite sample performance of the goodness-of-fit tests, and comparisons between the different criteria are made.

Key concepts: Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion, Deviance information criterion, Goodness of fit, Information Criteria, Mathematics, Statistics, Model selection

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Are Information criteria good enough to choose the right the number of regimes in Hidden Markov Models? — Research Paper | ScholarLens