Recommendations for visual predictive checks in Bayesian workflow

Introduction A key step in the Bayesian workflow for model building is the graphical assessment of model predictions, whether these are drawn from the prior or posterior predictive distribution. The goal of these assessments is to identify whether the model is a reasonable (and ideally accurate) representation of the domain knowledge and/or observed data. There are many commonly used visual predictive checks which can be misleading if their implicit assumptions do not match the reality. Thus, there is a need for more guidance for selecting, interpreting, and diagnosing appropriate visualizations. As a visual predictive check itself can be viewed as a model fit to data, assessing when this model fails to represent the data is important for drawing well-informed conclusions. Demonstration We present recommendations for appropriate visual predictive checks for observations that are: continuous, discrete, or a mixture of the two. We also discuss diagnostics to aid in the selection of visual methods. Specifically, in the detection of an incorrect assumption of continuously-distributed data: identifying when data is likely to be discrete or contain discrete components, detecting and estimating possible bounds in data, and a diagnostic of the goodness-of-fit to data for density plots made through kernel density estimates. Conclusion We offer recommendations and diagnostic tools to mitigate ad-hoc decision-making in visual predictive checks. These contributions aim to improve the robustness and interpretability of Bayesian model criticism practices. Materials The source code implementing the visualization functions and probabilistic models, as well as extended case-studies and the data for the examples are provided online. The version of these materials used in this article is available in Zenodo, and the latest version at https://github.com/TeemuSailynoja/visual-predictive-checks/tree/main/code.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Visualization and Interaction
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54337/jovi.v1i1.11478
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.95
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Recommendations for visual predictive checks in Bayesian workflow

Teemu Säilynoja, Osvaldo A. Martin, Andrew R. Johnson, Aki Vehtari
1 citations
Journal of Visualization and Interaction
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
5.95
article

Recommendations for visual predictive checks in Bayesian workflow

Teemu Säilynoja, Osvaldo A. Martin, Andrew R. Johnson, Aki Vehtari
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Introduction A key step in the Bayesian workflow for model building is the graphical assessment of model predictions, whether these are drawn from the prior or posterior predictive distribution. The goal of these assessments is to identify whether the model is a reasonable (and ideally accurate) representation of the domain knowledge and/or observed data. There are many commonly used visual predictive checks which can be misleading if their implicit assumptions do not match the reality. Thus, there is a need for more guidance for selecting, interpreting, and diagnosing appropriate visualizations. As a visual predictive check itself can be viewed as a model fit to data, assessing when this model fails to represent the data is important for drawing well-informed conclusions. Demonstration We present recommendations for appropriate visual predictive checks for observations that are: continuous, discrete, or a mixture of the two. We also discuss diagnostics to aid in the selection of visual methods. Specifically, in the detection of an incorrect assumption of continuously-distributed data: identifying when data is likely to be discrete or contain discrete components, detecting and estimating possible bounds in data, and a diagnostic of the goodness-of-fit to data for density plots made through kernel density estimates. Conclusion We offer recommendations and diagnostic tools to mitigate ad-hoc decision-making in visual predictive checks. These contributions aim to improve the robustness and interpretability of Bayesian model criticism practices. Materials The source code implementing the visualization functions and probabilistic models, as well as extended case-studies and the data for the examples are provided online. The version of these materials used in this article is available in Zenodo, and the latest version at https://github.com/TeemuSailynoja/visual-predictive-checks/tree/main/code.

Journal of Visualization and Interaction
Aalto University (FI)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
5.95
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.