Improved exact confidence intervals for a proportion using ranked-set sampling

We develop new exact confidence intervals for a proportion using ranked-set sampling (RSS). The existing intervals arise from applying the method of Clopper and Pearson (1934) to the total number of successes. We improve on the existing intervals by using the method of Blaker (2000) and by replacing the total number of successes with the maximum likelihood estimator of the proportion. The new intervals outperform the existing intervals in terms of average expected length, and they are also good in an absolute sense, as they come within a few percentage points of a new theoretical bound on the average expected length. Like the existing intervals, the new intervals use a perfect rankings assumption. They are no longer exact under imperfect rankings, but provide coverage close to nominal for mild departures from perfect rankings.     

On confidence intervals associated with the usual and adjusted likelihoods

In the presence of nuisance parameters, we drive an explicit higher order asymptotic formula to compare the expected lengths of confidence intervals given by likelihood ratio statistics arising from the usual profile likelihood and various adjustments thereof. Highest posterior density regions, with approximate frequentist validity, are also included in the study.     

On construction of asymptotically correct confidence intervals

In this paper we discuss constructing confidence intervals based on asymptotic generalized pivotal quantities (AGPQs). An AGPQ associates a distribution with the corresponding parameter, and then an asymptotically correct confidence interval can be derived directly from this distribution like Bayesian or fiducial interval estimates. We provide two general procedures for constructing AGPQs. We also present several examples to show that AGPQs can yield new confidence intervals with better finite-sample behaviors than traditional methods.     

Generalized confidence intervals for proportions of total variance in mixed linear models

Exact confidence intervals for a proportion of total variance, based on pivotal quantities, only exist for mixed linear models having two variance components. Generalized confidence intervals (GCIs) introduced by Weerahandi [1993. Generalized confidence intervals (Corr: 94V89 p726). J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 88, 899–905] are based on generalized pivotal quantities (GPQs) and can be constructed for a much wider range of models. In this paper, the author investigates the coverage probabilities, as well as the utility of GCIs, for a proportion of total variance in mixed linear models having more than two variance components. Particular attention is given to the formation of GPQs and GCIs in mixed linear models having three variance components in situations where the data exhibit complete balance, partial balance, and partial imbalance. The GCI procedure is quite general and provides a useful method to construct confidence intervals in a variety of applications.     

On the lengths of t-based confidence intervals

Confidence interval is a basic type of interval estimation in statistics. When dealing with samples from a normal population with the unknown mean and the variance, the traditional method to construct t-based confidence intervals for the mean parameter is to treat the n sampled units as n groups and build the intervals. Here we propose a generalized method. We first divide them into several equal-sized groups and then calculate the confidence intervals with the mean values of these groups. If we define “better” in terms of the expected length of the confidence interval, then the first method is better because the expected length of the confidence interval obtained from the first method is shorter. We prove this intuition theoretically. We also specify when the elements in each group are correlated, the first method is invalid, while the second can give us correct results in terms of the coverage probability. We illustrate this with analytical expressions. In practice, when the data set is extremely large and distributed in several data centers, the second method is a good tool to get confidence intervals, in both independent and correlated cases. Some simulations and real data analyses are presented to verify our theoretical results.     

Automatic selection of the proper family for simultaneous confidence intervals

Statisticians often employ simultaneous confidence intervals to reduce the likelihood of their drawing false conclusions when they must make a number of comparisons. To do this properly, it is necessary to consider the family of comparisons over which simultaneous confidence must be assured. Sometimes it is not clear what family of comparisons is appropriate. We describe how computer software can monitor the types of contrasts a user examines, and select the smallest family of contrasts that is likely to be of interest. We also describe how to calculate simultaneous confidence intervals for these families using a hybrid of the Bonferroni and Scheffé methods. Our method is especially suitable for problems with discrete and continuous predictors.     

Some Properties of the Exact and Score Methods for Binomial Proportion and Sample Size Calculation

In this article, we point out some interesting relations between the exact test and the score test for a binomial proportion p. Based on the properties of the tests, we propose some approximate as well as exact methods of computing sample sizes required for the tests to attain a specified power. Sample sizes required for the tests are tabulated for various values of p to attain a power of 0.80 at level 0.05. We also propose approximate and exact methods of computing sample sizes needed to construct confidence intervals with a given precision. Using the proposed exact methods, sample sizes required to construct 95% confidence intervals with various precisions are tabulated for p = .05(.05).5. The approximate methods for computing sample sizes for score confidence intervals are very satisfactory and the results coincide with those of the exact methods for many cases.     

Bootstrapping analogs of the one way MANOVA test

Abstract

Analogs of the classical one way MANOVA model have recently been suggested that do not assume that population covariance matrices are equal or that the error vector distribution is known. These tests are based on the sample mean and sample covariance matrix corresponding to each of the p populations. We show how to extend these tests using other measures of location such as the trimmed mean or coordinatewise median. These new bootstrap tests can have some outlier resistance, and can perform better than the tests based on the sample mean if the error vector distribution is heavy tailed.     

Confidence intervals for product of powers of the generalized variances of k multivariate normal populations

In this paper, some confidence intervals (CIs) for the product of powers of the generalized variances of k multivariate normal populations with possibly different dimensions are proposed. The performance of these CIs in terms of the coverage probabilities and average lengths were evaluated via a Monte Carlo simulation study. The results were found to be satisfactory. To demonstrate utility of the proposed CIs, applications on three real data sets were provided.     

Better nonparametric bootstrap confidence intervals for the correlation coefficient

We respond to criticism leveled at bootstrap confidence intervals for the correlation coefficient by recent authors by arguing that in the correlation coefficient case, non–standard methods should be employed. We propose two such methods. The first is a bootstrap coverage coorection algorithm using iterated bootstrap techniques (Hall, 1986; Beran, 1987a; Hall and Martin, 1988) applied to ordinary percentile–method intervals (Efron, 1979), giving intervals with high coverage accuracy and stable lengths and endpoints. The simulation study carried out for this method gives results for sample sizes 8, 10, and 12 in three parent populations. The second technique involves the construction of percentile–t bootstrap confidence intervals for a transformed correlation coefficient, followed by an inversion of the transformation, to obtain “transformed percentile–t” intervals for the correlation coefficient. In particular, Fisher's z–transformation is used, and nonparametric delta method and jackknife variance estimates are used to Studentize the transformed correlation coefficient, with the jackknife–Studentized transformed percentile–t interval yielding the better coverage accuracy, in general. Percentile–t intervals constructed without first using the transformation perform very poorly, having large expected lengths and erratically fluctuating endpoints. The simulation study illustrating this technique gives results for sample sizes 10, 15 and 20 in four parent populations. Our techniques provide confidence intervals for the correlation coefficient which have good coverage accuracy (unlike ordinary percentile intervals), and stable lengths and endpoints (unlike ordinary percentile–t intervals).     

Comparing Equal-Tail Probability and Unbiased Confidence Intervals for the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient

The conventional confidence interval for the intraclass correlation coefficient assumes equal-tail probabilities. In general, the equal-tail probability interval is biased and other interval procedures should be considered. Unbiased confidence intervals for the intraclass correlation coefficient are readily available. The equal-tail probability and unbiased intervals have exact coverage as they are constructed using the pivotal quantity method. In this article, confidence intervals for the intraclass correlation coefficient are built using balanced and unbalanced one-way random effects models. The expected length of confidence intervals serves as a tool to compare the two procedures. The unbiased confidence interval outperforms the equal-tail probability interval if the intraclass correlation coefficient is small and the equal-tail probability interval outperforms the unbiased interval if the intraclass correlation coefficient is large.     

Robust Confidence Intervals for the Bernoulli Parameter

Despite the simplicity of the Bernoulli process, developing good confidence interval procedures for its parameter—the probability of success p—is deceptively difficult. The binary data yield a discrete number of successes from a discrete number of trials, n. This discreteness results in actual coverage probabilities that oscillate with the n for fixed values of p (and with p for fixed n). Moreover, this oscillation necessitates a large sample size to guarantee a good coverage probability when p is close to 0 or 1.

It is well known that the Wilson procedure is superior to many existing procedures because it is less sensitive to p than any other procedures, therefore it is less costly. The procedures proposed in this article work as well as the Wilson procedure when 0.1 ≤p ≤ 0.9, and are even less sensitive (i.e., more robust) than the Wilson procedure when p is close to 0 or 1. Specifically, when the nominal coverage probability is 0.95, the Wilson procedure requires a sample size 1, 021 to guarantee that the coverage probabilities stay above 0.92 for any 0.001 ≤ min {p, 1 ?p} <0.01. By contrast, our procedures guarantee the same coverage probabilities but only need a sample size 177 without increasing either the expected interval width or the standard deviation of the interval width.     

Bias corrected empirical Bayes confidence intervals for the selected mean

Empirical Bayes (EB) methods are very useful for post selection inference. Following Datta et al. (2002 Datta, G. S., M. Ghosh, D. D. Smith, and P. Lahiri. 2002. On an asymptotic theory of conditional and unconditional coverage probabilities of empirical Bayes confidence intervals. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 29:139–52.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), we construct EB confidence intervals for the selected population mean. The EB intervals are adjusted to achieve the target coverage probabilities asymptotically up to the second order. Both unconditional coverage probabilities of EB intervals and corresponding probabilities conditional on ancillary statistics are found.     

Better approximate confidence intervals for a binomial parameter

This paper discusses five methods for constructing approximate confidence intervals for the binomial parameter Θ, based on Y successes in n Bernoulli trials. In a recent paper, Chen (1990) discusses various approximate methods and suggests a new method based on a Bayes argument, which we call method I here. Methods II and III are based on the normal approximation without and with continuity correction. Method IV uses the Poisson approximation of the binomial distribution and then exploits the fact that the exact confidence limits for the parameter of the Poisson distribution can be found through the x² distribution. The confidence limits of method IV are then provided by the Wilson-Hilferty approximation of the x². Similarly, the exact confidence limits for the binomial parameter can be expressed through the F distribution. Method V approximates these limits through a suitable version of the Wilson-Hilferty approximation. We undertake a comparison of the five methods in respect to coverage probability and expected length. The results indicate that method V has an advantage over Chen's Bayes method as well as over the other three methods.     

On confidence bounds for one-parameter exponential families

There exist various methods for providing confidence intervals for unknown parameters of interest on the basis of a random sample. Generally, the bounds are derived from a system of non-linear equations. In this article, we present a general solution to obtain an unbiased confidence interval with confidence coefficient 1 ? α in one-parameter exponential families. Also we discuss two Bayesian credible intervals, the highest posterior density (HPD) and relative surprise (RS) credible intervals. Standard criteria like the coverage length and coverage probability are used to assess the performance of the HPD and RS credible intervals. Simulation studies and real data applications are presented for illustrative purposes.     

Comparison of conditional and unconditional confidence intervals for the double exponential distribution

Conditional confidence intervals for the location parameter of the double exponential distribution based on maximum likelihood estimators conditioned on a set of ancillary statistics and the corresponding unconditional confidence intervals based on the maximum likelihood estimators alone are compared in two ways. Monte Carlo techniques are used and the conditional approach appears to give slightly better results although agreement as n becomes larger is noted     

The monotone boundary property and the full coverage property of confidence intervals for a binomial proportion

The methodology for deriving the exact confidence coefficient of some confidence intervals for a binomial proportion is proposed in Wang [2007. Exact confidence coefficients of confidence intervals for a binomial proportion. Statist. Sinica 17, 361–368]. The methodology requires two conditions of confidence intervals: the monotone boundary property and the full coverage property. In this paper, we show that for some confidence intervals of a binomial proportion, the two properties hold for any sample size. Based on results presented in this paper, the procedure in Wang [2007. Exact confidence coefficients of confidence intervals for a binomial proportion. Statist. Sinica 17, 361–368] can be directly used to calculate the exact confidence coefficients of these confidence intervals for any fixed sample size.     

A comparative study of confidence intervals for negative binomial proportion

In this paper, we investigate four existing and three new confidence interval estimators for the negative binomial proportion (i.e., proportion under inverse/negative binomial sampling). An extensive and systematic comparative study among these confidence interval estimators through Monte Carlo simulations is presented. The performance of these confidence intervals are evaluated in terms of their coverage probabilities and expected interval widths. Our simulation studies suggest that the confidence interval estimator based on saddlepoint approximation is more appealing for large coverage levels (e.g., nominal level≤1% ) whereas the score confidence interval estimator is more desirable for those commonly used coverage levels (e.g., nominal level>1% ). We illustrate these confidence interval construction methods with a real data set from a maternal congenital heart disease study.     

The performance of model averaged tail area confidence intervals

We investigate the exact coverage and expected length properties of the model averaged tail area (MATA) confidence interval proposed by Turek and Fletcher, CSDA, 2012, in the context of two nested, normal linear regression models. The simpler model is obtained by applying a single linear constraint on the regression parameter vector of the full model. For given length of response vector and nominal coverage of the MATA confidence interval, we consider all possible models of this type and all possible true parameter values, together with a wide class of design matrices and parameters of interest. Our results show that, while not ideal, MATA confidence intervals perform surprisingly well in our regression scenario, provided that we use the minimum weight within the class of weights that we consider on the simpler model.     

Modifications of the Mack-Wolfe umbrella tests for a generalized Behrens-Fisher problem

We are concerned with testing procedures for umbrella alternatives in the k-sample location problem without making the assumption that the underlying populations have the same shape. Modifications of the Mack-Wolfe tests are proposed for the cases when the peak of the umbrella is known or unknown. The proposed procedures are exactly distribution-free when the continuous populations have the same shape. The modified test for peak-known umbrella alternatives remains asymptotically distribution-free when the continuous populations are symmetric, but not necessarily with the same shape.