Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2105.12852

Identifying Brexit voting patterns in the British House of Commons: an analysis based on Bayesian mixture models with flexible concomitant covariate effects

Marco Berrettini·Giuliano Galimberti·Saverio Ranciati·Thomas Brendan Murphy
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Brexit and its implications are an ongoing topic of interest since the Brexit referendum in 2016. In 2019 the House of commons held a number of "indicative" and "meaningful" votes as part of the Brexit approval process. The voting behaviour of members of the parliament in these votes is investigated to gain insight into the Brexit approval process. In particular, a mixture model with concomitant covariates is developed to identify groups of members of parliament who share similar voting behaviour while also considering characteristics of the members of parliament. The novelty of the method lies in the flexible structure used to model the effect of concomitant covariates on the component weights of the mixture, with the (potentially nonlinear) terms represented as a smooth function of the covariates. Results show this approach allows to quantify the effect of the age of members of parliament, as well as preferences and competitiveness in the constituencies they represent, on their position towards Brexit. This helps grouping the aforementioned politicians into homogeous clusters, whose composition departs sensibly from that of the parties.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Marco Berrettini, Giuliano Galimberti, Saverio Ranciati, Thomas Brendan Murphy. 2021-05-26. Identifying Brexit voting patterns in the British House of Commons: an analysis based on Bayesian mixture models with flexible concomitant covariate effects. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrsssc/qlae004

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗