Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Bayesian modeling with PyMC. Build hierarchical models, MCMC (NUTS), variational inference, LOO/WAIC comparison, posterior checks, for probabilistic programming and inference.
.claude/skills/pymc-bayesian-modeling/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-18 | ✓→✓ | = Same ✓ | — | — |
| case-08 | ✗→✗ | = Same ✗ | — | — |
PyMC is a Python library for Bayesian modeling and probabilistic programming. Build, fit, validate, and compare Bayesian models using PyMC's modern API (version 5.x+), including hierarchical models, MCMC sampling (NUTS), variational inference, and model comparison (LOO, WAIC).
This skill should be used when:
Follow this workflow for building and validating Bayesian models:
pythonimport pymc as pm import arviz as az import numpy as np # Load and prepare data X = ... # Predictors y = ... # Outcomes # Standardize predictors for better sampling X_mean = X.mean(axis=0) X_std = X.std(axis=0) X_scaled = (X - X_mean) / X_std
Key practices:
coords for claritypythoncoords = { 'predictors': ['var1', 'var2', 'var3'], 'obs_id': np.arange(len(y)) } with pm.Model(coords=coords) as model: # Priors alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=1) beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=1, dims='predictors') sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1) # Linear predictor mu = alpha + pm.math.dot(X_scaled, beta) # Likelihood y_obs = pm.Normal('y_obs', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y, dims='obs_id')
Key practices:
HalfNormal or Exponential for scale parametersdims) instead of shape when possiblepm.Data() for values that will be updated for predictionsAlways validate priors before fitting:
pythonwith model: prior_pred = pm.sample_prior_predictive(samples=1000, random_seed=42) # Visualize az.plot_ppc(prior_pred, group='prior')
Check:
pythonwith model: # Optional: Quick exploration with ADVI # approx = pm.fit(n=20000) # Full MCMC inference idata = pm.sample( draws=2000, tune=1000, chains=4, target_accept=0.9, random_seed=42, idata_kwargs={'log_likelihood': True} # For model comparison )
Key parameters:
draws=2000: Number of samples per chaintune=1000: Warmup samples (discarded)chains=4: Run 4 chains for convergence checkingtarget_accept=0.9: Higher for difficult posteriors (0.95-0.99)log_likelihood=True for model comparisonUse the diagnostic script:
pythonfrom scripts.model_diagnostics import check_diagnostics results = check_diagnostics(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma'])
Check:
If issues arise:
target_accept=0.95, use non-centered parameterizationValidate model fit:
pythonwith model: pm.sample_posterior_predictive(idata, extend_inferencedata=True, random_seed=42) # Visualize az.plot_ppc(idata)
Check:
python# Summary statistics print(az.summary(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma'])) # Posterior distributions az.plot_posterior(idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma']) # Coefficient estimates az.plot_forest(idata, var_names=['beta'], combined=True)
pythonX_new = ... # New predictor values X_new_scaled = (X_new - X_mean) / X_std with model: pm.set_data({'X_scaled': X_new_scaled}) post_pred = pm.sample_posterior_predictive( idata.posterior, var_names=['y_obs'], random_seed=42 ) # Extract prediction intervals y_pred_mean = post_pred.posterior_predictive['y_obs'].mean(dim=['chain', 'draw']) y_pred_hdi = az.hdi(post_pred.posterior_predictive, var_names=['y_obs'])
For continuous outcomes with linear relationships:
pythonwith pm.Model() as linear_model: alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10) beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors) sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1) mu = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta) y = pm.Normal('y', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y_obs)
Use template: assets/linear_regression_template.py
For binary outcomes:
pythonwith pm.Model() as logistic_model: alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10) beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors) logit_p = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta) y = pm.Bernoulli('y', logit_p=logit_p, observed=y_obs)
For grouped data (use non-centered parameterization):
pythonwith pm.Model(coords={'groups': group_names}) as hierarchical_model: # Hyperpriors mu_alpha = pm.Normal('mu_alpha', mu=0, sigma=10) sigma_alpha = pm.HalfNormal('sigma_alpha', sigma=1) # Group-level (non-centered) alpha_offset = pm.Normal('alpha_offset', mu=0, sigma=1, dims='groups') alpha = pm.Deterministic('alpha', mu_alpha + sigma_alpha * alpha_offset, dims='groups') # Observation-level mu = alpha[group_idx] sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1) y = pm.Normal('y', mu=mu, sigma=sigma, observed=y_obs)
Use template: assets/hierarchical_model_template.py
Critical: Always use non-centered parameterization for hierarchical models to avoid divergences.
For count data:
pythonwith pm.Model() as poisson_model: alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=0, sigma=10) beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sigma=10, shape=n_predictors) log_lambda = alpha + pm.math.dot(X, beta) y = pm.Poisson('y', mu=pm.math.exp(log_lambda), observed=y_obs)
For overdispersed counts, use NegativeBinomial instead.
For autoregressive processes:
pythonwith pm.Model() as ar_model: sigma = pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1) rho = pm.Normal('rho', mu=0, sigma=0.5, shape=ar_order) init_dist = pm.Normal.dist(mu=0, sigma=sigma) y = pm.AR('y', rho=rho, sigma=sigma, init_dist=init_dist, observed=y_obs)
Use LOO or WAIC for model comparison:
pythonfrom scripts.model_comparison import compare_models, check_loo_reliability # Fit models with log_likelihood models = { 'Model1': idata1, 'Model2': idata2, 'Model3': idata3 } # Compare using LOO comparison = compare_models(models, ic='loo') # Check reliability check_loo_reliability(models)
Interpretation:
Check Pareto-k values:
When models are similar, average predictions:
pythonfrom scripts.model_comparison import model_averaging averaged_pred, weights = model_averaging(models, var_name='y_obs')
Scale parameters (σ, τ):
pm.HalfNormal('sigma', sigma=1) - Default choicepm.Exponential('sigma', lam=1) - Alternativepm.Gamma('sigma', alpha=2, beta=1) - More informativeUnbounded parameters:
pm.Normal('theta', mu=0, sigma=1) - For standardized datapm.StudentT('theta', nu=3, mu=0, sigma=1) - Robust to outliersPositive parameters:
pm.LogNormal('theta', mu=0, sigma=1)pm.Gamma('theta', alpha=2, beta=1)Probabilities:
pm.Beta('p', alpha=2, beta=2) - Weakly informativepm.Uniform('p', lower=0, upper=1) - Non-informative (use sparingly)Correlation matrices:
pm.LKJCorr('corr', n=n_vars, eta=2) - eta=1 uniform, eta>1 prefers identityContinuous outcomes:
pm.Normal('y', mu=mu, sigma=sigma) - Default for continuous datapm.StudentT('y', nu=nu, mu=mu, sigma=sigma) - Robust to outliersCount data:
pm.Poisson('y', mu=lambda) - Equidispersed countspm.NegativeBinomial('y', mu=mu, alpha=alpha) - Overdispersed countspm.ZeroInflatedPoisson('y', psi=psi, mu=mu) - Excess zerosBinary outcomes:
pm.Bernoulli('y', p=p) or pm.Bernoulli('y', logit_p=logit_p)Categorical outcomes:
pm.Categorical('y', p=probs)See: references/distributions.md for comprehensive distribution reference
Default and recommended for most models:
pythonidata = pm.sample( draws=2000, tune=1000, chains=4, target_accept=0.9, random_seed=42 )
Adjust when needed:
target_accept=0.95 or higherpm.Metropolis() for discrete varsFast approximation for exploration or initialization:
pythonwith model: approx = pm.fit(n=20000, method='advi') # Use for initialization start = approx.sample(return_inferencedata=False)[0] idata = pm.sample(start=start)
Trade-offs:
See: references/sampling_inference.md for detailed sampling guide
pythonfrom scripts.model_diagnostics import create_diagnostic_report create_diagnostic_report( idata, var_names=['alpha', 'beta', 'sigma'], output_dir='diagnostics/' )
Creates:
pythonfrom scripts.model_diagnostics import check_diagnostics results = check_diagnostics(idata)
Checks R-hat, ESS, divergences, and tree depth.
Symptom: idata.sample_stats.diverging.sum() > 0
Solutions:
target_accept=0.95 or 0.99Symptom: ESS < 400
Solutions:
draws=5000Symptom: R-hat > 1.01
Solutions:
tune=2000, draws=5000Solutions:
cores=8, chains=8dims) for claritytarget_accept=0.9 as baseline (higher if needed)log_likelihood=True for model comparisonThis skill includes:
references/)distributions.md: Comprehensive catalog of PyMC distributions organized by category (continuous, discrete, multivariate, mixture, time series). Use when selecting priors or likelihoods.sampling_inference.md: Detailed guide to sampling algorithms (NUTS, Metropolis, SMC), variational inference (ADVI, SVGD), and handling sampling issues. Use when encountering convergence problems or choosing inference methods.workflows.md: Complete workflow examples and code patterns for common model types, data preparation, prior selection, and model validation. Use as a cookbook for standard Bayesian analyses.scripts/)model_diagnostics.py: Automated diagnostic checking and report generation. Functions: check_diagnostics() for quick checks, create_diagnostic_report() for comprehensive analysis with plots.model_comparison.py: Model comparison utilities using LOO/WAIC. Functions: compare_models(), check_loo_reliability(), model_averaging().assets/)linear_regression_template.py: Complete template for Bayesian linear regression with full workflow (data prep, prior checks, fitting, diagnostics, predictions).hierarchical_model_template.py: Complete template for hierarchical/multilevel models with non-centered parameterization and group-level analysis.pythonwith pm.Model(coords={'var': names}) as model: # Priors param = pm.Normal('param', mu=0, sigma=1, dims='var') # Likelihood y = pm.Normal('y', mu=..., sigma=..., observed=data)
pythonidata = pm.sample(draws=2000, tune=1000, chains=4, target_accept=0.9)
pythonfrom scripts.model_diagnostics import check_diagnostics check_diagnostics(idata)
pythonfrom scripts.model_comparison import compare_models compare_models({'m1': idata1, 'm2': idata2}, ic='loo')
pythonwith model: pm.set_data({'X': X_new}) pred = pm.sample_posterior_predictive(idata.posterior)
pm.model_to_graphviz(model) to visualize model structureidata.to_netcdf('results.nc')az.from_netcdf('results.nc')| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +14 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.