Table 3 Posterior distribution of parameters and posterior predictive checks, neural-network algorithm
ReferenceNamenWmaxσQP-value (summary)P-value (full)
Prior4 (1; 19)1.39 (0.05; 7.39)0.14 (0.01; 0.74)2.25 (0.59; 3.91)
de Visser et al. (1997)A15.24 (0.59; 20.96)0.14 (-0.07; 1.88)0.15 (0.08; 0.37)1.60 (0.42; 3.52)0.170.83
A26.72 (1.63; 23.09)0.34 (-0.09; 3.12)0.12 (0.05; 0.31)1.69 (0.66; 3.51)0.230.97
Costanzo et al. (2010)B16.00 (1.54; 19.08)1.01 (0.26; 3.88)0.09 (0.04; 0.29)1.91 (0.91; 3.75)0.250
B23.44 (0.31; 12.82)0.28 (0.12; 1.02)0.09 (0.05; 0.20)2.96 (1.64; 4.19)0.30.02
B33.33 (0.13; 13.78)0.40 (0.13; 1.78)0.10 (0.06; 0.23)2.33 (1.19; 4.36)0.310.01
B48.28 (1.64; 24.06)1.21 (0.04; 5.10)0.14 (0.03; 0.48)1.57 (0.77; 3.13)0.160.06
B54.16 (0.89; 14.84)0.43 (0.07; 2.37)0.08 (0.05; 0.23)2.17 (1.02; 4.37)0.260.02
B63.01 (-0.72; 13.87)0.34 (-0.05; 1.96)0.10 (0.05; 0.29)2.23 (1.16; 4.68)0.240.01
B74.47 (-0.25; 15.71)0.64 (0.12; 2.23)0.11 (0.05; 0.33)2.07 (0.97; 4.12)0.140.02
B81.63 (-1.91; 12.29)1.32 (0.32; 4.92)0.11 (0.00; 0.48)2.24 (1.10; 4.17)0.020.01
B94.12 (0.48; 15.58)0.39 (0.02; 2.38)0.09 (0.04; 0.26)2.12 (1.07; 4.26)0.170
B103.46 (0.63; 15.18)0.32 (0.07; 1.58)0.07 (0.04; 0.20)2.34 (1.08; 4.35)0.060.01
Whitlock and Bourguet (2000)C14.92 (2.12; 13.24)1.02 (0.58; 3.20)0.30 (0.16; 0.66)2.98 (1.71; 4.06)0.050
C22.09 (0.21; 7.03)1.10 (0.82; 2.38)0.57 (0.39; 1.03)2.58 (1.01; 3.57)0.060
Rokyta et al. (2011)D7.00 (2.95; 15.21)0.46 (0.36; 0.82)0.21 (0.15; 0.39)2.08 (0.83; 3.82)0.150.08
Sanjuán et al. (2004)E16.28 (1.64; 19.82)0.19 (0.06; 0.86)0.15 (0.07; 0.41)1.65 (0.23; 3.79)0.370.01
E25.28 (2.11; 12.45)0.20 (0.09; 0.55)0.14 (0.10; 0.25)2.26 (1.34; 3.42)0.160.03
Khan et al. (2011)F6.62 (1.63; 22.28)0.42 (0.21; 0.98)0.08 (0.05; 0.19)1.89 (0.81; 3.70)0.430.03
Chou et al. (2011)G3.65 (0.86; 15.86)1.09 (0.73; 2.48)0.07 (0.03; 0.21)2.67 (1.30; 4.05)0.420.43
Weinreich et al. (2006)H114.39 (7.25; 29.54)12.97 (12.16; 15.73)0.89 (0.64; 1.46)1.40 (0.14; 2.48)0.010
Tan et al. (2011)H213.18 (5.76; 28.86)12.02 (10.87; 14.83)0.46 (0.18; 1.08)1.83 (0.81; 2.80)0.010
Schenk et al. (2013)H34.81 (1.89; 15.30)3.17 (1.08; 8.91)0.30 (0.13; 0.79)2.94 (1.53; 3.91)0.340.07
H48.89 (5.63; 17.44)6.24 (5.27; 7.94)0.75 (0.51; 1.13)1.40 (0.62; 2.15)00
Lozovsky et al. (2009)I18.24 (3.79; 19.68)9.20 (7.78; 14.61)0.57 (0.26; 1.24)2.22 (0.55; 3.51)0.020
Brown et al. (2010)I25.16 (2.50; 13.08)7.76 (7.41; 8.95)0.23 (0.15; 0.37)3.84 (3.17; 4.49)00
Jiang et al. (2013)I31.28 (-0.58; 5.47)2.33 (2.19; 2.71)0.47 (0.32; 0.79)3.70 (3.11; 4.24)0.120.03
  • The median posterior distribution of parameters and the 2.5–97.5% quantile interval (equivalent to 95% higher posterior density) of the posterior distribution of parameters for the rejection algorithm. The prior is shown for comparison (first row). The P-value for the test of adequacy with Fisher’s model is indicated.