Exact Confidence Intervals,Based on the Z Statistic,for the Difference Between Two Proportions

We show that the confidence interval version of the extended exact unconditional Z test of Suissa and Shuster (1985) for testing the equality of two binomial proportions is due to general results of Buehler (1957), Sudakov and references cited there (1974), and Harris and Soms (1984). We apply these results to obtain exact unconditional confidence intervals for the difference between two proportions, deriving an explicit solution for the “best” outcome, make some comments on Buehler's (1957) method and give a numerical example. The Appendix contains a listing of the necessary FORTRAN programs.     

Confidence Intervals for Difference Between Two Poisson Rates

In this article, we develop four explicit asymptotic two-sided confidence intervals for the difference between two Poisson rates via a hybrid method. The basic idea of the proposed method is to estimate or recover the variances of the two Poisson rate estimates, which are required for constructing the confidence interval for the rate difference, from the confidence limits for the two individual Poisson rates. The basic building blocks of the approach are reliable confidence limits for the two individual Poisson rates. Four confidence interval estimators that have explicit solutions and good coverage levels are employed: the first normal with continuity correction, Rao score, Freeman and Tukey, and Jeffreys confidence intervals. Using simulation studies, we examine the performance of the four hybrid confidence intervals and compare them with three existing confidence intervals: the non-informative prior Bayes confidence interval, the t confidence interval based on Satterthwait's degrees of freedom, and the Bayes confidence interval based on Student's t confidence coefficient. Simulation results show that the proposed hybrid Freeman and Tukey, and the hybrid Jeffreys confidence intervals can be highly recommended because they outperform the others in terms of coverage probabilities and widths. The other methods tend to be too conservative and produce wider confidence intervals. The application of these confidence intervals are illustrated with three real data sets.     

Revisiting Beal's Confidence Intervals for the Difference of Two Binomial Proportions

Confidence interval construction for the difference of two independent binomial proportions is a well-known problem with a full panoply of proposed solutions. In this paper, we focus largely on the family of intervals proposed by Beal (1987 Beal , S. ( 1987 ). Asymptotic confidence intervals for the difference between two binomial parameters for use with small samples . Biometrics 43 : 941 – 950 . [CSA] [CROSSREF] [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). This family, which includes the Haldane and Jeffreys–Perks intervals as special cases, assumes a symmetric prior distribution for the population proportions p ₁ and p ₂. We propose new methods that allow the currently observed data to set the prior distribution by taking a parametric empirical-Bayes approach; in addition, we also provide an investigation of the new interval' behaviors in small-sample situations. Unlike other solutions, our intervals can be used adaptively for experiments conducted in multiple stages over time. We illustrate this notion using data from an Argentinean study involving the Mal Rio Cuarto virus and its transmission to susceptible maize crops.     

A Simple Approximate Procedure for Constructing Binomial and Poisson Tolerance Intervals

The problems of constructing tolerance intervals for the binomial and Poisson distributions are considered. Closed-form approximate equal-tailed tolerance intervals (that control percentages in both tails) are proposed for both distributions. Exact coverage probabilities and expected widths are evaluated for the proposed equal-tailed tolerance intervals and the existing intervals. Furthermore, an adjustment to the nominal confidence level is suggested so that an equal-tailed tolerance interval can be used as a tolerance interval which includes a specified proportion of the population, but does not necessarily control percentages in both tails. Comparison of such coverage-adjusted tolerance intervals with respect to coverage probabilities and expected widths indicates that the closed-form approximate tolerance intervals are comparable with others, and less conservative, with minimum coverage probabilities close to the nominal level in most cases. The approximate tolerance intervals are simple and easy to compute using a calculator, and they can be recommended for practical applications. The methods are illustrated using two practical examples.     

Exact Confidence Intervals for Proportions Estimated by Group Testing with Different Group Sizes

Group testing is the process of combining individual samples and testing them as a group for the presence of an attribute. The use of such testing to estimate proportions is an important statistical tool in many applications. When samples are collected and tested in groups of different size, complications arise in the construction of exact confidence intervals. In this case, the numbers of positive groups has a multivariate distribution, and the difficulty stems from a lack of a natural ordering of the sample points. Exact two‐sided intervals such as the equal‐tail method based on maximum likelihood estimation, and those based on joint probability or likelihood ratio statistics, have been previously considered. In this paper several new estimators are developed and assessed. We show that the combined tails (or Blaker) method based on a suitable ordering statistic, is the best choice in this setting. The methods are illustrated using a study involving the infection prevalence of Myxobolus cerebralis among free‐ranging fish.     

Confidence Intervals for Gini's Diversity Measure and Shannon's Entropy Using Adjusted Proportions

Abstract

Asymptotic confidence intervals are given for two functions of multinomial outcome probabilities: Gini's diversity measure and Shannon's entropy. “Adjusted” proportions are used in all asymptotic mean and variance formulas, along with a possible logarithmic transformation. Exact confidence coefficients are computed in some cases. Monte Carlo simulation is used in other cases to compare actual coverages to nominal ones. Some recommendations are made.     

Coverage‐adjusted Confidence Intervals for a Binomial Proportion

We consider the classic problem of interval estimation of a proportion p based on binomial sampling. The ‘exact’ Clopper–Pearson confidence interval for p is known to be unnecessarily conservative. We propose coverage adjustments of the Clopper–Pearson interval that incorporate prior or posterior beliefs into the interval. Using heatmap‐type plots for comparing confidence intervals, we show that the coverage‐adjusted intervals have satisfying coverage and shorter expected lengths than competing intervals found in the literature.     

Confidence Intervals for the Weighted Sum of Two Independent Binomial Proportions

Confidence intervals for the difference of two binomial proportions are well known, however, confidence intervals for the weighted sum of two binomial proportions are less studied. We develop and compare seven methods for constructing confidence intervals for the weighted sum of two independent binomial proportions. The interval estimates are constructed by inverting the Wald test, the score test and the Likelihood ratio test. The weights can be negative, so our results generalize those for the difference between two independent proportions. We provide a numerical study that shows that these confidence intervals based on large‐sample approximations perform very well, even when a relatively small amount of data is available. The intervals based on the inversion of the score test showed the best performance. Finally, we show that as for the difference of two binomial proportions, adding four pseudo‐outcomes to the Wald interval for the weighted sum of two binomial proportions improves its coverage significantly, and we provide a justification for this correction.     

Approximate Bayesianity of Frequentist Confidence Intervals for a Binomial Proportion

The well-known Wilson and Agresti–Coull confidence intervals for a binomial proportion p are centered around a Bayesian estimator. Using this as a starting point, similarities between frequentist confidence intervals for proportions and Bayesian credible intervals based on low-informative priors are studied using asymptotic expansions. A Bayesian motivation for a large class of frequentist confidence intervals is provided. It is shown that the likelihood ratio interval for p approximates a Bayesian credible interval based on Kerman’s neutral noninformative conjugate prior up to O(n^{? 1}) in the confidence bounds. For the significance level α ? 0.317, the Bayesian interval based on the Jeffreys’ prior is then shown to be a compromise between the likelihood ratio and Wilson intervals. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.     

Model‐Averaged Confidence Intervals

We develop an approach to evaluating frequentist model averaging procedures by considering them in a simple situation in which there are two‐nested linear regression models over which we average. We introduce a general class of model averaged confidence intervals, obtain exact expressions for the coverage and the scaled expected length of the intervals, and use these to compute these quantities for the model averaged profile likelihood (MPI) and model‐averaged tail area confidence intervals proposed by D. Fletcher and D. Turek. We show that the MPI confidence intervals can perform more poorly than the standard confidence interval used after model selection but ignoring the model selection process. The model‐averaged tail area confidence intervals perform better than the MPI and postmodel‐selection confidence intervals but, for the examples that we consider, offer little over simply using the standard confidence interval for θ under the full model, with the same nominal coverage.     

Confidence Intervals Based on Local Linear Smoother

Point-wise confidence intervals for a non-parametric regression function in conjunction with the popular local linear smoother are considered. The confidence intervals are based on the asymptotic normal distribution of the local linear smoother. Their coverage accuracy is evaluated by developing Edgeworth expansion for the coverage probability. It is found that the coverage error near the boundary of the support of the regression function is of a larger order than that in the interior, which implies that the local linear smoother is not adaptive to the boundary in terms of coverage. This is quite unexpected as the local linear smoother is adaptive to the boundary in terms of the mean squared error.     

Bayesian Confidence Interval for the Difference of Two Proportions in the Matched-Paired Design

This article studies the construction of Bayesian confidence interval for the difference of two proportions in the matched-pair design, and applies it to the equiva-lence or non inferiority test. Under the Dirichlet prior distribution, the exact posterior distribution of difference of two proportions is derived. The tail confidence interval and the highest posterior density (HPD) interval are studied, and their frequentist performance are investigated by simulation in terms of the mean coverage probability of interval. Our results suggest to use tail interval at Jeffreys prior for testing equivalence or non inferiority in matched-pair design.     

Some Small-Sample Properties of the Student t Confidence Intervals

For the two-sided Student t confidence interval for the mean of a normal distribution there is, for any sample size, a sufficiently large confidence level that ensures that the interval covers all the observations; there are also sufficiently small confidence levels guaranteeing, respectively, that (a) the interval does not cover all the observations and (b) the interval lies within the extreme observations. Necessary and sufficient conditions are also obtained for the width of the confidence interval to always exceed the sample range, as well as for the reverse inequality. Some implications of the results are discussed.     

Confidence Intervals for a Binomial Parameter after Observing No Successes

The easily computed, one-sided confidence interval for the binomial parameter provides the basis for an interesting classroom example of scientific thinking and its relationship to confidence intervals. The upper limit can be represented as the sample proportion from a number of “successes” in a future experiment of the same sample size. The upper limit reported by most people corresponds closely to that producing a 95 percent classical confidence interval and has a Bayesian interpretation.     

Confidence Intervals for Variance Components in Measurement System Capability Studies

In Measurement System Analysis a relevant issue is how to find confidence intervals for the parameters used to evaluate the capability of a gauge. In literature approximate solutions are available but they produce so wide intervals that they are often not effective in the decision process. In this article we introduce a new approach and, with particular reference to the parameter γ_R, i.e., the ratio of the variance due to the process and the variance due to the instrument, we show that, under quite realistic assumptions, we obtain confidence intervals narrower than other methods. An application to a real microelectronic case study is reported.     

Small Sample Confidence Intervals for the Odds Ratio

Abstract

Numerous methods—based on exact and asymptotic distributions—can be used to obtain confidence intervals for the odds ratio in 2 × 2 tables. We examine ten methods for generating these intervals based on coverage probability, closeness of coverage probability to target, and length of confidence intervals. Based on these criteria, Cornfield’s method, without the continuity correction, performed the best of the methods examined here. A drawback to use of this method is the significant possibility that the attained coverage probability will not meet the nominal confidence level. Use of a mid-P value greatly improves methods based on the “exact” distribution. When combined with the Wilson rule for selection of a rejection set, the resulting method is a procedure that performed very well. Crow’s method, with use of a mid-P, performed well, although it was only a slight improvement over the Wilson mid-P method. Its cumbersome calculations preclude its general acceptance. Woolf's (logit) method—with the Haldane–Anscombe correction— performed well, especially with regard to length of confidence intervals, and is recommended based on ease of computation.     

Confidence Intervals and the Within-the-Bar Bias

Bar graphs displaying means have been shown to bias interpretations of the underlying distributions: viewers typically report higher likelihoods for values within a bar than outside of a bar. One explanation is that viewer attention is driven by the whole bar, rather than only the edge that provides information about an average. This study explored several approaches to correcting this bias. Bar graphs with 95% confidence intervals were used with different levels of contrast to manipulate attention directed to the bar. Viewers showed less bias when the salience of the bar itself was reduced. Response latencies were lowest and bias was eliminated when participants were presented with only a confidence interval and no bar.     

不同总体量和样本量时如何计算比例的置信区间

在总体或者总体子集不大情况下的抽样调查中,往往不易得出合理的关于比例的区间估计。这一类问题在抽样调查实践中已经严重到非说不可的地步。文章讨论了在样本量不大或者(和)在总体不大时估计比例的置信区间时往往忽略的问题,并给出了在不同情况下如何计算置信区间的方法。     

A Wavelet Method for Confidence Intervals in the Density Model

Abstract.  We present a wavelet procedure for defining confidence intervals for f ( x ₀), where x ₀ is a given point and f is an unknown density from which there are independent observations. We use an undersmoothing method which is shown to be near optimal (up to a logarithmic term) in a first order sense. We propose a second order correction using the Edgeworth expansion. The adaptation with respect to the unknown regularity of f is given via a Lepskii type algorithm and has the advantage to be well located. The theoretical results are proved under weak assumptions and concern very irregular or oscillating functions. An empirical study gives some hints for choosing the constant of the threshold level. The results are very encouraging for the length of the intervals as well as for the coverage accuracy.     

两个正态分布变异系数差与商的近似置信区间

变异系数是衡量产品质量稳定性的一个重要指标,在实际应用中经常需要研究两种不同环境下变异系数的差异问题。文章在大样本场合给出了两个正态分布变异系数的差与商的近似置信区间、单侧近似置信下限与单侧近似置信上限的计算公式,这些公式计算简单,仅依赖于两个样本变异系数及样本容量,且Monte-Carlo模拟结果表明可以达到给出的置信水平。同时,通过几个算例可以为方法的应用提供参考。