SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2606.12164

Bayesian Effect Selection for Additive Quantile Regression with an Application to Air Pollution Thresholds

Abstract

Air pollution regulatory limits are typically defined in terms of exceedances of concentration thresholds which are naturally related to conditional quantiles of the pollutant distribution and are therefore of direct relevance for assessing severe pollution events. At the same time, it is important to determine not only whether a covariate affects air pollution but also whether this effect is linear, nonlinear, or both. We address these issues by developing a Bayesian effect selection approach for additive quantile regression. While commonly used mixed model representations (MMRs) of penalized splines allow for flexible nonlinear effects, they do not provide a meaningful separation of linear and nonlinear effect components. We therefore employ a Demmler-Reinsch basis expansion, which yields an orthogonal decomposition of each additive effect into linear and nonlinear parts and show theoretically that both effect components can be estimated consistently. To facilitate data-driven model building, we propose Bayesian effect selection with separate spike and slab priors on the scalar importance parameters associated with the linear and nonlinear components and implement an efficient Gibbs sampler. Through simulation studies, we demonstrate robustness to the misspecification induced by the employed asymmetric Laplace working likelihood and show superior performance relative to the MMR. In a detailed analysis of air pollution data in Madrid, Spain we highlight the added value of flexibly modeling extreme nitrogen dioxide (NO$_2$) concentrations and reveal that threshold-relevant pollution levels are driven differently by climatological variables and traffic-related spatial structure. These findings underline the need for advanced statistical models that support short-term decision-making and help local authorities mitigate, or potentially prevent, exceedances of NO$_2$ concentration limits.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Nadja Klein, Aaron Wei Qi Lee, Jorge Mateu. 2026-06-10. Bayesian Effect Selection for Additive Quantile Regression with an Application to Air Pollution Thresholds. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12164

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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