Bayesian Analysis of Markov Point Processes

  • Kasper K. Berthelsen
  • Jesper Møller
Part of the Lecture Notes in Statistics book series (LNS, volume 185)


Recently Møller, Pettitt, Berthelsen and Reeves [17] introduced a new MCMC methodology for drawing samples from a posterior distribution when the likelihood function is only specified up to a normalising constant. We illustrate the method in the setting of Bayesian inference for Markov point processes; more specifically we consider a likelihood function given by a Strauss point process with priors imposed on the unknown parameters. The method relies on introducing an auxiliary variable specified by a normalised density which approximates the likelihood well. For the Strauss point process we use a partially ordered Markov point process as the auxiliary variable. As the method requires simulation from the “unknown” likelihood, perfect simulation algorithms for spatial point processes become useful.

Key words

Bayesian inference Markov chain Monte Carlo Markov point process Partially ordered Markov point process Perfect simulation Spatial point process Strauss process 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    A.J. Baddeley and R. Turner. Practical maximum pseudolikelihood for spatial point patterns. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Statistics, 42:283–322, 2000.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    K.K. Berthelsen and J. Møller. A primer on perfect simulation for spatial point processes. Bulletin of the Brazilian Mathematical Society, 33:351–367, 2002.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    K.K. Berthelsen and J. Møller. Likelihood and non-parametric Bayesian MCMC inference for spatial point processes based on perfect simulation and path sampling. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 30:549–564, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    K.K. Berthelsen and J. Møller. Semi-parametric Bayesian inference for inhomogeneous Markov point processes. In preparation.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J.E. Besag. Some methods of statistical analysis for spatial data. Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute, 47:77–92, 1977.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    N.A.C. Cressie and J.L. Davidson. Image analysis with partially ordered Markov models. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 29(1):1–26, 1998.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    N.A.C. Cressie, J. Zhu, A.J. Baddeley and M.G. Nair. Directed Markov point processes as limits of partially ordered Markov models. Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 2:5–21, 2000.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. Gelman and X.-L. Meng. Simulating normalizing contants: From importance sampling to bridge sampling to path sampling. Statistical Science, 13:163–185, 1998.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    C.J. Geyer. Likelihood inference for spatial point processes. In O. E. Barndorff-Nielsen, W. S. Kendall, and M. N. M. van Lieshout, editors, Stochastic Geometry: Likelihood and Computation, pp. 79–140, Boca Raton, Florida, 1999. Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    C.J. Geyer and J. Møller. Simulation procedures and likelihood inference for spatial point processes. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 21:359–373, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    O. Häggström, M.N.M. Van Lieshout and J. Møller. Characterisation results and Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms including exact simulation for some spatial point processes. Bernoulli, 5:641–658, 1999.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    J. Heikkinen and A. Penttinen. Bayesian smoothing in the estimation of the pair potential function of Gibbs point processes. Bernoulli, 5:1119–1136, 1999.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.L. Jensen and J. Møller. Pseudolikelihood for exponential family models of spatial point processes. Annals of Applied Probability, 3:445–461, 1991.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    F.P. Kelly and B.D. Ripley. A note on Strauss’ model for clustering. Biometrika, 63:357–360, 1976.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    W.S. Kendall and J. Møller. Perfect simulation using dominating processes on ordered spaces, with application to locally stable point processes. Advances in Applied Probability, 32:844–865, 2000.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    M.N.M. van Lieshout. Markov Point Processes and their Applications. Imperial College Press, London, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    J. Møller, A.N. Pettitt, K.K. Berthelsen and R.W. Reeves. An efficient MCMC method for distributions with intractable normalising constants. Research report r-2004-02, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Aalborg University, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    J. Møller and R.P. Waagepetersen. An introduction to simulation-based inference for spatial point processes. In J. Møller, editor, Spatial Statistics and Computational Methods, Lecture Notes in Statistics 173, pp. 143–198. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    J. Møller and R.P. Waagepetersen. Statistical Inference and Simulation for Spatial Point Processes. Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2003.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    L. Tierney. Markov chains for exploring posterior distributions. Annals of Statistics, 22:1701–1728, 1994.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kasper K. Berthelsen
    • 1
  • Jesper Møller
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematical SciencesAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations