4.6 Article

Bayesian inference of scaled versus fractional Brownian motion

Journal

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1751-8121/ac60e7

Keywords

Bayesian inference; scaled Brownian motion; single particle tracking

Funding

  1. Sackler postdoctoral fellowship
  2. Pikovsky-Valazzi matching scholarship, Tel Aviv University
  3. National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea [2020R1A2C4002490]
  4. German Science Foundation (DFG) [ME 1525/12-1]
  5. Foundation for Polish Science (Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej, FNR) within an Alexander von Humboldt Honorary Polish Research Scholarship
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2020R1A2C4002490] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present a Bayesian inference scheme for scaled Brownian motion and investigate its performance on parameter estimation and model selection in a combined inference with fractional Brownian motion. The results show that the procedure is able to accurately resolve the true model and parameters for trajectories of a few hundred time points, and the approach using the prior of the synthetic data generation process is optimal based on decision theory.
We present a Bayesian inference scheme for scaled Brownian motion, and investigate its performance on synthetic data for parameter estimation and model selection in a combined inference with fractional Brownian motion. We include the possibility of measurement noise in both models. We find that for trajectories of a few hundred time points the procedure is able to resolve well the true model and parameters. Using the prior of the synthetic data generation process also for the inference, the approach is optimal based on decision theory. We include a comparison with inference using a prior different from the data generating one.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available