SELECTING THE m POPULATIONS WITH LARGEST MEANS FROM k NORMAL POPULATIONS WITH UNKNOWN VARIANCES

This paper gives a two-sample procedure for selecting the m populations with the largest means from k normal populations with unknown variances. The method is a generalization of a recent work by Ofosu [1973] and hence should find wider practical applications. The experimenter takes an initial sample of preset size N₀ from each population and computes an unbiased estimate of its variance. From this estimate he determines the second sample size for the population according to a table presented for this purpose. The populations associated with the m largest overall sample means will be selected. The procedure is shown to satisfy a confidence requirement similar to that of Ofosu.     

SELECTING "DEMONSTRABLY BEST" OR "DEMONSTRABLY WORST" EXPONENTIAL POPULATIONS

Consider k independent observations Y_i (i= 1,., k) from two-parameter exponential populations _i with location parameters μ and the same scale parameter If the μ_i are ranked as consider population as the “worst” population and II_p(k) as the “best” population (with some tagging so that p{) and p(k) are well defined in the case of equalities). If the Y_i are ranked as we consider the procedure, “Select provided Y_R(k) Y_r(k) is sufficiently large so that is demonstrably better than the other populations.” A similar procedure is studied for selecting the “demonstrably worst” population.     

Bayesian prediction with a random sample size for the burr lifetime distribution

This paper is concerned with the problem of deriving Bayesian prediction bounds for the Burr distribution when the sample size is a random variable. Prediction bounds for both the future observations (the case of two-sample prediction) and the remaining observations in the same sample (the case of one-sample prediction) will be derived. The analysis will depend mainly on assuming that the size of the sample is a random variable having the Poisson distribution. Finally, numerical examples are given to illustrate the results.     

Upper tolerance limit for the largest observation from censored samples

This paper deals with obtaining an upper tolerance limit for a largest observation X_(n) in an ordered sample of size n from a continuous distribution where the first m observations X₍₁₎ < X₍₂₎ < … < X_(m), l ≤ m < n, have been observed. A criterion of “goodness” of tolerance limit is developed, and a method is given to obtain the best tolerance limit. This method is applied to exponential and Pareto distributions.     

On Some Aspects of Unbiased Estimation of Parameters in Quasi-Binomial Distributions

In this article, an attempt has been made to settle the question of existence of unbiased estimator of the key parameter p of the quasi-binomial distributions of Type I (QBD I) and of Type II (QBD II), with/without any knowledge of the other parameter φ appearing in the expressions for probability functions of the QBD's. This is studied with reference to a single observation, a random sample of finite size m as also with samples drawn by suitably defined sequential sampling rules.     

On the minimum of a random sample

The family of distributions, having the property that n times the minimum observation of a random sample of size n has the same distribution as the original, is studied.     

Asymptotic spacings theory with applications to the two-sample problem

The asymptotic distribution theory of test statistics which are functions of spacings is studied here. Distribution theory under appropriate close alternatives is also derived and used to find the locally most powerful spacing tests. For the two-sample problem, which is to test if two independent samples are from the same population, test statistics which are based on “spacing-frequencies” (i.e., the numbers of observations of one sample which fall in between the spacings made by the other sample) are utilized. The general asymptotic distribution theory of such statistics is studied both under the null hypothesis and under a sequence of close alternatives.     

Sample Size

Conventionally, sample size calculations are viewed as calculations determining the right number of subjects needed for a study. Such calculations follow the classical paradigm: “for a difference X, I need sample size Y.” We argue that the paradigm “for a sample size Y, I get information Z” is more appropriate for many studies and reflects the information needed by scientists when planning a study. This approach applies to both physiological studies and Phase I and II interventional studies. We provide actual examples from our own consulting work to demonstrate this. We conclude that sample size should be viewed not as a unique right number, but rather as a factor needed to assess the utility of a study.     

A BERRY-ESSEEN BOUND FOR THE RATIO ESTIMATOR

Suppose that R is the ratio estimator based on a simple random sample of size n drawn without replacement from a bivariate population of N elements. A Berry-Esseen bound for von Mises statistics based on samples from a finite population is used to derive a Berry-Esseen bound for R.     

The Uniform-Laplace Distribution and the D-Test

A new two-sample rank test for location is proposed. This test, called the D-test, is asymptotically efficient for underlying densities which follow a “flat-topped” Laplace distribution. The D-statistic is simple to compute, and the test may be suitable when there is censoring. The D-test includes the median test as a special case.     

Rank tests in the two-sample scale problem with unequal and unknown locations

The two-sample scale problem is studied in the case of unequal and unknown location parameters. The method proposed is based on the idea of Moses (1963) and it is distribution-free. The two samples are separated into random subgroups of the same sizek. It is proposed to choosek=4 and to apply the Wilconxon test or the Savage test to the ranges or sample variances of the subgroups. The asymptotic power functions of the tests are compared. For small and moderate sample sizes simulations are carried out. Relations to some other procedures, especially to the method of Compagnone and Denker (1996) are briefly discussed.     

A General Model for Repeated Audit Controls Using Monotone Subsampling

Abstract

In categorical repeated audit controls, fallible auditors classify sample elements in order to estimate the population fraction of elements in certain categories. To take possible misclassifications into account, subsequent checks are performed with a decreasing number of observations. In this paper a model is presented for a general repeated audit control system, where k subsequent auditors classify elements into r categories. Two different subsampling procedures will be discussed, named “stratified” and “random” sampling. Although these two sampling methods lead to different probability distributions, it is shown that the likelihood inferences are identical. The MLE are derived and the situations with undefined MLE are examined in detail; it is shown that an unbiased MLE can be obtained by stratified sampling. Three different methods for constructing confidence upper limits are discussed; the Bayesian upper limit seems to be the most satisfactory. Our theoretical results are applied to two cases with r = 2 and k = 2 or 3, respectively.     

Failure–censored reliability sampling plans for the exponential distribution

In this paper we examine the failure-censored sampling plans for the two–parameter exponential distri- bution based on m random samples, each of size n. The suggested procedure is based on exact results and only the first failure time of each sample is needed. The values of the acceptability constant are also tabulated for selected values of p _α ¹ p _β ¹, α and β. Further, a comparison of the proposed sampling plans with ordinary sampling plans using a sample of size mn is made. When compared to ordinary sampling plans, the proposed plan has an advantage in terms of shorter test-time and a saving of resources.     

On bivariate transformation of scale distributions

ABSTRACT

Elsewhere, I have promoted (univariate continuous) “transformation of scale” (ToS) distributions having densities of the form 2g(Π^?1(x)) where g is a symmetric distribution and Π is a transformation function with a special property. Here, I develop bivariate (readily multivariate) ToS distributions. Univariate ToS distributions have a transformation of random variable relationship with Azzalini-type skew-symmetric distributions; the bivariate ToS distribution here arises from marginal variable transformation of a particular form of bivariate skew-symmetric distribution. Examples are given, as are basic properties—unimodality, a covariance property, random variate generation—and connections with a bivariate inverse Gaussian distribution are pointed out.     

Evaluating the Risk in Sample Size Determination

This article considers experimental costs, besides power evaluation, in order to determine the sample size of an experiment. We focus on the use of standard tools of decision theory in the context of sample size determination. The loss function is defined, from the perspective of an experimenter which adopts the classical frequentist approach, and the risk function is computed. Then, we show the behavior of the risk function in the two-sample t-test, for a small sample experimental setting, with a medium-sized sample, and with large samples. Moreover, an objective criterion for a convenient sample size choice is introduced. Finally, a practical example of sample size determination, which also considers risk computation, is shown.     

Likelihood ratio comparisons among spacings related to both one or two samples

In this paper, we investigate some stochastic comparisons in terms of likelihood ratio ordering between spacings from independent random variables exponentially distributed with different scale parameters. We partially solve some open problems in [Wen S, Lu Q, Hu T. Likelihood ratio orderings of spacings of heterogeneous exponential random variables. J Multivariate Anal. 2007;98:743–756] for a one-sample problem and in [Hu T, Lu Q, Wen S. Stochastic comparisons and dependence of spacings from two samples of exponential random variables. Commun Stat – Theory Methods 2006;35:979–988] for a two-sample problem. Specifically, we prove that the second spacing is always smaller than the third spacing in terms of the likelihood ratio order and we provide the ordering among all spacings in the case n=4. In the two-sample case, we establish comparisons between the second spacings related to each sample under certain conditions.     

Editorial Collaborators

Abstract

The present note explores sources of misplaced criticisms of P-values, such as conflicting definitions of “significance levels” and “P-values” in authoritative sources, and the consequent misinterpretation of P-values as error probabilities. It then discusses several properties of P-values that have been presented as fatal flaws: That P-values exhibit extreme variation across samples (and thus are “unreliable”), confound effect size with sample size, are sensitive to sample size, and depend on investigator sampling intentions. These properties are often criticized from a likelihood or Bayesian framework, yet they are exactly the properties P-values should exhibit when they are constructed and interpreted correctly within their originating framework. Other common criticisms are that P-values force users to focus on irrelevant hypotheses and overstate evidence against those hypotheses. These problems are not however properties of P-values but are faults of researchers who focus on null hypotheses and overstate evidence based on misperceptions that p?=?0.05 represents enough evidence to reject hypotheses. Those problems are easily seen without use of Bayesian concepts by translating the observed P-value p into the Shannon information (S-value or surprisal) –log₂(p).     

A characterization of invariant power-series abundance distributions

Consider a population the individuals in which can be classified into groups. Let y, the number of individuals in a group, be distributed according to a probability function f(y;ø_o) where the functional form f is known. The random variable y cannot be observed directly, and hence a random sample of groups cannot be obtained. Consider a random sample of N individuals from the population. Suppose the N individuals are distributed into S groups with x₁, x₂, …, x_S representatives respectively. The random variable x, the number of individuals in a group in the sample, will be a fraction of its population counterpart y, and the distributions of x and y need not have the same functional form. If the two random variables x and y have the same functional form for their distributions, then the particular common distribution is called an invariant abundance distribution. The paper provides a characterization of invariant abundance distributions in the class of power-series distributions.     

Comparing Objective and Subjective Bayes Factors for the Two-Sample Comparison: The Classification Theorem in Action

Many Bayes factors have been proposed for comparing population means in two-sample (independent samples) studies. Recently, Wang and Liu presented an “objective” Bayes factor (BF) as an alternative to a “subjective” one presented by Gönen et al. Their report was evidently intended to show the superiority of their BF based on “undesirable behavior” of the latter. A wonderful aspect of Bayesian models is that they provide an opportunity to “lay all cards on the table.” What distinguishes the various BFs in the two-sample problem is the choice of priors (cards) for the model parameters. This article discusses desiderata of BFs that have been proposed, and proposes a new criterion to compare BFs, no matter whether subjectively or objectively determined. A BF may be preferred if it correctly classifies the data as coming from the correct model most often. The criterion is based on a famous result in classification theory to minimize the total probability of misclassification. This criterion is objective, easily verified by simulation, shows clearly the effects (positive or negative) of assuming particular priors, provides new insights into the appropriateness of BFs in general, and provides a new answer to the question, “Which BF is best?”     

Two-sample high-dimensional empirical likelihood

In this paper, we apply empirical likelihood for two-sample problems with growing high dimensionality. Our results are demonstrated for constructing confidence regions for the difference of the means of two p-dimensional samples and the difference in value between coefficients of two p-dimensional sample linear model. We show that empirical likelihood based estimator has the efficient property. That is, as p → ∞ for high-dimensional data, the limit distribution of the EL ratio statistic for the difference of the means of two samples and the difference in value between coefficients of two-sample linear model is asymptotic normal distribution. Furthermore, empirical likelihood (EL) gives efficient estimator for regression coefficients in linear models, and can be as efficient as a parametric approach. The performance of the proposed method is illustrated via numerical simulations.