A test for equality of variances with censored samples

A variance homogeneity test for type II right-censored samples is proposed. The test is based on Bartlett's statistic. The asymptotic distribution of the statistic is investigated. The limiting distribution is that of a linear combination of i.i.d. chi-square variables with 1 degree of freedom. By using simulation, the critical values of the null distribution of the modified Bartlett's statistic for testing the homogeneity of variances of two normal populations are obtained when the sample sizes and censoring levels are not equal. Also, we investigate the properties of the proposed test (size, power and robustness). Results show that the distribution of the test statistic depends on the censoring level. An example of the use of the new methodology in animal science involving reproduction in ewes is provided.     

Accurate inference for scale and location families

A great deal of inference in statistics is based on making the approximation that a statistic is normally distributed. The error in doing so is generally O(n^?1/2), where n is the sample size and can be considered when the distribution of the statistic is heavily biased or skewed. This note shows how one may reduce the error to O(n^?(j+1)/2), where j is a given integer. The case considered is when the statistic is the mean of the sample values of a continuous distribution with a scale or location change after the sample has undergone an initial transformation, which may depend on an unknown parameter. The transformation corresponding to Fisher's score function yields an asymptotically efficient procedure.     

A NEW TEST FOR EQUALITY OF VARIANCES FOR k NORMAL POPULATIONS

ABSTRACT

A simple test based on Gini's mean difference is proposed to test the hypothesis of equality of population variances. Using 2000 replicated samples and empirical distributions, we show that the test compares favourably with Bartlett's and Levene's test for the normal population. Also, it is more powerful than Bartlett's and Levene's tests for some alternative hypotheses for some non-normal distributions and more robust than the other two tests for large sample sizes under some alternative hypotheses. We also give an approximate distribution to the test statistic to enable one to calculate the nominal levels and P-values.     

Effects of the generalized Box–Cox transformation on Type I error rate and power of Hotelling's T 2

Most multivariate statistical techniques rely on the assumption of multivariate normality. The effects of nonnormality on multivariate tests are assumed to be negligible when variance–covariance matrices and sample sizes are equal. Therefore, in practice, investigators usually do not attempt to assess multivariate normality. In this simulation study, the effects of skewed and leptokurtic multivariate data on the Type I error and power of Hotelling's T ² were examined by manipulating distribution, sample size, and variance–covariance matrix. The empirical Type I error rate and power of Hotelling's T ² were calculated before and after the application of generalized Box–Cox transformation. The findings demonstrated that even when variance–covariance matrices and sample sizes are equal, small to moderate changes in power still can be observed.     

Jackknife empirical likelihood method for testing the equality of two variances

In this paper, we propose a nonparametric method based on jackknife empirical likelihood ratio to test the equality of two variances. The asymptotic distribution of the test statistic has been shown to follow χ² distribution with the degree of freedom 1. Simulations have been conducted to show the type I error and the power compared to Levene's test and F test under different distribution settings. The proposed method has been applied to a real data set to illustrate the testing procedure.     

Sample size calculation for testing non-inferiority and equivalence under Poisson distribution

When counting the number of chemical parts in air pollution studies or when comparing the occurrence of congenital malformations between a uranium mining town and a control population, we often assume Poisson distribution for the number of these rare events. Some discussions on sample size calculation under Poisson model appear elsewhere, but all these focus on the case of testing equality rather than testing equivalence. We discuss sample size and power calculation on the basis of exact distribution under Poisson models for testing non-inferiority and equivalence with respect to the mean incidence rate ratio. On the basis of large sample theory, we further develop an approximate sample size calculation formula using the normal approximation of a proposed test statistic for testing non-inferiority and an approximate power calculation formula for testing equivalence. We find that using these approximation formulae tends to produce an underestimate of the minimum required sample size calculated from using the exact test procedure. On the other hand, we find that the power corresponding to the approximate sample sizes can be actually accurate (with respect to Type I error and power) when we apply the asymptotic test procedure based on the normal distribution. We tabulate in a variety of situations the minimum mean incidence needed in the standard (or the control) population, that can easily be employed to calculate the minimum required sample size from each comparison group for testing non-inferiority and equivalence between two Poisson populations.     

A test for bivariate two sample location problem

A consistent test for difference in locations between two bivariate populations is proposed, The test is similar as the Mann-Whitney test and depends on the exceedances of slopes of the two samples where slope for each sample observation is computed by taking the ratios of the observed values. In terms of the slopes, it reduces to a univariate problem, The power of the test has been compared with those of various existing tests by simulation. The proposed test statistic is compared with Mardia's(1967) test statistics, Peters-Randies(1991) test statistic, Wilcoxon's rank sum test. statistic and Hotelling' T² test statistic using Monte Carlo technique. It performs better than other statistics compared for small differences in locations between two populations when underlying population is population 7(light tailed population) and sample size 15 and 18 respectively. When underlying population is population 6(heavy tailed population) and sample sizes are 15 and 18 it performas better than other statistic compared except Wilcoxon's rank sum test statistics for small differences in location between two populations. It performs better than Mardia's(1967) test statistic for large differences in location between two population when underlying population is bivariate normal mixture with probability p=0.5, population 6, Pearson type II population and Pearson type VII population for sample size 15 and 18 .Under bivariate normal population it performs as good as Mardia' (1967) test statistic for small differences in locations between two populations and sample sizes 15 and 18. For sample sizes 25 and 28 respectively it performs better than Mardia's (1967) test statistic when underlying population is population 6, Pearson type II population and Pearson type VII population     

Sample size determinations when two binomial proportions are very small

Sample size determination for testing the hypothesis of equality of proportions with a specified type I and type I1 error probabilitiesis of ten based on normal approximation to the binomial distribution. When the proportionsinvolved are very small, the exact distribution of the test statistic may not follow the assumed distribution. Consequently, the sample size determined by the test statistic may not result in the sespecifiederror probabilities. In this paper the author proposes a square root formula and compares it with several existing sample size approximation methods. It is found that with small proportion (p≦.01) the squar eroot formula provides the closest approximation to the exact sample sizes which attain a specified type I and type II error probabilities. Thes quare root formula is simple inform and has the advantage that equal differencesare equally detectable.     

Testing equality of generalized variances of k multivariate normal populations

Generalized variance is a measure of dispersion of multivariate data. Comparison of dispersion of multivariate data is one of the favorite issues for multivariate quality control, generalized homogeneity of multidimensional scatter, etc. In this article, the problem of testing equality of generalized variances of k multivariate normal populations by using the Bartlett's modified likelihood ratio test (BMLRT) is proposed. Simulations to compare the Type I error rate and power of the BMLRT and the likelihood ratio test (LRT) methods are performed. These simulations show that the BMLRT method has a better chi-square approximation under the null hypothesis. Finally, a practical example is given.     

Distributional Studies and the Computer: An Analysis of Durbin's Rank Test

A study of the distribution of a statistic involves two major steps: (a) working out its asymptotic, large n, distribution, and (b) making the connection between the asymptotic results and the distribution of the statistic for the sample sizes used in practice. This crucial second step is not included in many studies. In this article, the second step is applied to Durbin's (1951) well-known rank test of treatment effects in balanced incomplete block designs (BIB's). We found that asymptotic, χ², distributions do not provide adequate approximations in most BIB's. Consequently, we feel that several of Durbin's recommendations should be altered.     

Mixed Graphical Model Selection Using Holm's Procedure

The problem of selecting a graphical model is considered as a performing simultaneously multiple tests. The control of the overall Type I error on the selected graph is done using the so famous Holm's procedure. We prove that when we use a consistent edge exclusion test the selected graph is asymptotically equal to the true graph with probability at least equal to a fixed level 1 ? α. This method is then used for the selection of mixed concentration graph models by performing the χ²-edge exclusion test. We also apply the method to two classical examples and to simulated data. We compare the overall error of the selected model with the one obtained using the stepwise method. We establish that the control is better when we use the Holm's procedure.     

A Note on Bartlett's M Test for Homogeneity of Variances

After pointing out a drawback in Bartlett's chi-square approximation, we suggest a simple modification and a Gamma approximation to improve Bartlett's M test for homogeneity of variances.     

Robust test for means when population variances are unequal

We consider the problem of testing the equality of two population means when the population variances are not necessarily equal. We propose a Welch-type statistic, say T^* _c, based on Tiku!s ‘1967, 1980’ modified maximum likelihood estimators, and show that this statistic is robust to symmetric and moderately skew distributions. We investigate the power properties of the statistic T^* _c; T^* _c clearly seems to be more powerful than Yuen's ‘1974’ Welch-type robust statistic based on the trimmed sample means and the matching sample variances. We show that the analogous statistics based on the ‘adaptive’ robust estimators give misleading Type I errors. We generalize the results to testing linear contrasts among k population means     

Comparison op some two sample tests for equality of variances

The F-test, F max-test and Bartlett's test are compared on the basis of power for the purpose of testing the equality of variances in two normal populations. The power of each test is expressed as a linear combination of F-probabilities. Bartlett's test is noted to be unbiased, UMPU, consistent against all alterna¬tives and the test which yields minimum length confidence intervals on the ratio of the variancesλ=σ₁ ² /σ² ₂ The two samples Bartlett critical values, although not recognized as such, are found in the works of other authors. Tables of the powers of each test are given for various values of λ, levels of significance a and the respective sample sizes, n₁ and n₂.     

Asymptotic Comparison of Two Discriminants Used in Normal Covariate Classification

In this paper, we examine the performance of Anderson's classification statistic with covariate adjustment in comparison with the usual Anderson's classification statistic without covariate adjustment in a two-population normal covariate classification problem. The same problem has been investigated using different methods of comparison by some authors. See the bibliography. The aim of this paper is to give a direct comparison based upon the asymptotic probabilities of misclassification. It is shown that for large equal sample size of a training sample from each population, Anderson's classification statistic with covariate adjustment and cut-off point equal to zero, has better performance.     

The Tale of Cochran's Rule: My Contingency Table has so Many Expected Values Smaller than 5, What Am I to Do?

In an informal way, some dilemmas in connection with hypothesis testing in contingency tables are discussed. The body of the article concerns the numerical evaluation of Cochran's Rule about the minimum expected value in r × c contingency tables with fixed margins when testing independence with Pearson's X² statistic using the χ² distribution.     

A likelihood ratio test of a homoscedastic normal mixture against a heteroscedastic normal mixture

It is generally assumed that the likelihood ratio statistic for testing the null hypothesis that data arise from a homoscedastic normal mixture distribution versus the alternative hypothesis that data arise from a heteroscedastic normal mixture distribution has an asymptotic χ ² reference distribution with degrees of freedom equal to the difference in the number of parameters being estimated under the alternative and null models under some regularity conditions. Simulations show that the χ ² reference distribution will give a reasonable approximation for the likelihood ratio test only when the sample size is 2000 or more and the mixture components are well separated when the restrictions suggested by Hathaway (Ann. Stat. 13:795–800, 1985) are imposed on the component variances to ensure that the likelihood is bounded under the alternative distribution. For small and medium sample sizes, parametric bootstrap tests appear to work well for determining whether data arise from a normal mixture with equal variances or a normal mixture with unequal variances.     

ON THE USE OF X2 AS A TEST OF INDEPENDENCE IN CONTINGENCY TABLES WITH SMALL CELL EXPECTATIONS

When an r×c contingency table has many cells having very small expectations, the usual χ² approximation to the upper tail of the Pearson χ² goodness-of-fit statistic becomes very conservative. The alternatives considered in this paper are to use either a lognormal approximation, or to scale the usual χ² approximation. The study involves thousands of tables with various sample sizes, and with tables whose sizes range from 2×2 through 2×10×10. Subject to certain restrictions the new scaled χ² approximations are recommended for use with tables having an average cell expectation as small as 0·5.     

A bivariate signed rank test for two sample location problem

An affine-invariant signed rank test for the difference in location between two symmetric populations is proposed. The proposed test statistic is compared with Hotelling's T2 test statistic, Mardia's(1967)test statistic, Peters-Randles(1991) test statistic and Wilcoxon's rank sum test statistic using a Monte Carlo Study. It performs better than Mardia's test statistic under almost all populations considered. Under the bivariate normal distribution, it performs better than other test statistics compared for small differences in location between two populations except Hotelling's T2. It performs better than all statistics, including Hotelling's T , for sample size 15 when samples are drawn from Pearson type.     

Optimizing the wald-wolfowitz runs statistic using a linkage tolerance: guidelines based on computer simulation

When performing the Wald-Wolfowitz runs test, observations from two samples are combined and ordered, and the test statistic is the number of sequences of observations from the same sample. This test statistic is equivalent to the number of links between observations from different samples, if we consider each observation to be linked to the next higher and next lower observations. While it is known that the Wald-Wolfowitz runs test is not very powerful, what would be the effect on the power of the Wald-Wolfowitz runs test if all observations within a specified Euclidean distance or “tolerance” were linked instead? This question is motivated by the simulation results of Whaley and Quade (1985), who found that for normal data, the power of the multi-dimensional runs test using a linkage tolerance compared favorably to Hotelling's T² in some instances. The results of a similar simulation procedure show that the power of the Wald-Wolfowitz runs test does indeed improve when observations are linked using a tolerance. The results also suggest that a better large sample approximation to the distribution of the test statistic needs to be found.