Nonparametric Kernel Methods with Errors‐in‐Variables: Constructing Estimators,Computing them,and Avoiding Common Mistakes

Estimating a curve nonparametrically from data measured with error is a difficult problem that has been studied by many authors. Constructing a consistent estimator in this context can sometimes be quite challenging, and in this paper we review some of the tools that have been developed in the literature for kernel‐based approaches, founded on the Fourier transform and a more general unbiased score technique. We use those tools to rederive some of the existing nonparametric density and regression estimators for data contaminated by classical or Berkson errors, and discuss how to compute these estimators in practice. We also review some mistakes made by those working in the area, and highlight a number of problems with an existing R package decon .     

Empirical Uncertain Bayes Methods in Area‐level Models

Random effects model can account for the lack of fitting a regression model and increase precision of estimating area‐level means. However, in case that the synthetic mean provides accurate estimates, the prior distribution may inflate an estimation error. Thus, it is desirable to consider the uncertain prior distribution, which is expressed as the mixture of a one‐point distribution and a proper prior distribution. In this paper, we develop an empirical Bayes approach for estimating area‐level means, using the uncertain prior distribution in the context of a natural exponential family, which we call the empirical uncertain Bayes (EUB) method. The regression model considered in this paper includes the Poisson‐gamma and the binomial‐beta, and the normal‐normal (Fay–Herriot) model, which are typically used in small area estimation. We obtain the estimators of hyperparameters based on the marginal likelihood by using a well‐known expectation‐maximization algorithm and propose the EUB estimators of area means. For risk evaluation of the EUB estimator, we derive a second‐order unbiased estimator of a conditional mean squared error by using some techniques of numerical calculation. Through simulation studies and real data applications, we evaluate a performance of the EUB estimator and compare it with the usual empirical Bayes estimator.     

Covariate Decomposition Methods for Longitudinal Missing‐at‐Random Data and Predictors Associated with Subject‐Specific Effects

Investigators often gather longitudinal data to assess changes in responses over time within subjects and to relate these changes to within‐subject changes in predictors. Missing data are common in such studies and predictors can be correlated with subject‐specific effects. Maximum likelihood methods for generalized linear mixed models provide consistent estimates when the data are ‘missing at random’ (MAR) but can produce inconsistent estimates in settings where the random effects are correlated with one of the predictors. On the other hand, conditional maximum likelihood methods (and closely related maximum likelihood methods that partition covariates into between‐ and within‐cluster components) provide consistent estimation when random effects are correlated with predictors but can produce inconsistent covariate effect estimates when data are MAR. Using theory, simulation studies, and fits to example data this paper shows that decomposition methods using complete covariate information produce consistent estimates. In some practical cases these methods, that ostensibly require complete covariate information, actually only involve the observed covariates. These results offer an easy‐to‐use approach to simultaneously protect against bias from both cluster‐level confounding and MAR missingness in assessments of change.     

Robust Inference in Two‐phase Sampling Designs with Application to Unit Nonresponse

Influential units occur frequently in surveys, especially in business surveys that collect economic variables whose distributions are highly skewed. A unit is said to be influential when its inclusion or exclusion from the sample has an important impact on the sampling error of estimates. We extend the concept of conditional bias attached to a unit and propose a robust version of the double expansion estimator, which depends on a tuning constant. We determine the tuning constant that minimizes the maximum estimated conditional bias. Our results can be naturally extended to the case of unit nonresponse, the set of respondents often being viewed as a second‐phase sample. A robust version of calibration estimators, based on auxiliary information available at both phases, is also constructed.     

The Box–Cox Transformation and Non‐Iterative Estimation Methods for Ordinal Log‐Linear Models

Recently Beh and Farver investigated and evaluated three non‐iterative procedures for estimating the linear‐by‐linear parameter of an ordinal log‐linear model. The study demonstrated that these non‐iterative techniques provide estimates that are, for most types of contingency tables, statistically indistinguishable from estimates from Newton's unidimensional algorithm. Here we show how two of these techniques are related using the Box–Cox transformation. We also show that by using this transformation, accurate non‐iterative estimates are achievable even when a contingency table contains sampling zeros.     

Robust Bayesian nonlinear mixed‐effects modeling of time to positivity in tuberculosis trials

Early phase 2 tuberculosis (TB) trials are conducted to characterize the early bactericidal activity (EBA) of anti‐TB drugs. The EBA of anti‐TB drugs has conventionally been calculated as the rate of decline in colony forming unit (CFU) count during the first 14 days of treatment. The measurement of CFU count, however, is expensive and prone to contamination. Alternatively to CFU count, time to positivity (TTP), which is a potential biomarker for long‐term efficacy of anti‐TB drugs, can be used to characterize EBA. The current Bayesian nonlinear mixed‐effects (NLME) regression model for TTP data, however, lacks robustness to gross outliers that often are present in the data. The conventional way of handling such outliers involves their identification by visual inspection and subsequent exclusion from the analysis. However, this process can be questioned because of its subjective nature. For this reason, we fitted robust versions of the Bayesian nonlinear mixed‐effects regression model to a wide range of TTP datasets. The performance of the explored models was assessed through model comparison statistics and a simulation study. We conclude that fitting a robust model to TTP data obviates the need for explicit identification and subsequent “deletion” of outliers but ensures that gross outliers exert no undue influence on model fits. We recommend that the current practice of fitting conventional normal theory models be abandoned in favor of fitting robust models to TTP data.     

Semi‐parametric small‐area estimation by combining time‐series and cross‐sectional data methods

In survey sampling, policymaking regarding the allocation of resources to subgroups (called small areas) or the determination of subgroups with specific properties in a population should be based on reliable estimates. Information, however, is often collected at a different scale than that of these subgroups; hence, the estimation can only be obtained on finer scale data. Parametric mixed models are commonly used in small‐area estimation. The relationship between predictors and response, however, may not be linear in some real situations. Recently, small‐area estimation using a generalised linear mixed model (GLMM) with a penalised spline (P‐spline) regression model, for the fixed part of the model, has been proposed to analyse cross‐sectional responses, both normal and non‐normal. However, there are many situations in which the responses in small areas are serially dependent over time. Such a situation is exemplified by a data set on the annual number of visits to physicians by patients seeking treatment for asthma, in different areas of Manitoba, Canada. In cases where covariates that can possibly predict physician visits by asthma patients (e.g. age and genetic and environmental factors) may not have a linear relationship with the response, new models for analysing such data sets are required. In the current work, using both time‐series and cross‐sectional data methods, we propose P‐spline regression models for small‐area estimation under GLMMs. Our proposed model covers both normal and non‐normal responses. In particular, the empirical best predictors of small‐area parameters and their corresponding prediction intervals are studied with the maximum likelihood estimation approach being used to estimate the model parameters. The performance of the proposed approach is evaluated using some simulations and also by analysing two real data sets (precipitation and asthma).     

Predictive Inference for Big,Spatial, Non‐Gaussian Data: MODIS Cloud Data and its Change‐of‐Support

Remote sensing of the earth with satellites yields datasets that can be massive in size, nonstationary in space, and non‐Gaussian in distribution. To overcome computational challenges, we use the reduced‐rank spatial random effects (SRE) model in a statistical analysis of cloud‐mask data from NASA's Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument on board NASA's Terra satellite. Parameterisations of cloud processes are the biggest source of uncertainty and sensitivity in different climate models’ future projections of Earth's climate. An accurate quantification of the spatial distribution of clouds, as well as a rigorously estimated pixel‐scale clear‐sky‐probability process, is needed to establish reliable estimates of cloud‐distributional changes and trends caused by climate change. Here we give a hierarchical spatial‐statistical modelling approach for a very large spatial dataset of 2.75 million pixels, corresponding to a granule of MODIS cloud‐mask data, and we use spatial change‐of‐Support relationships to estimate cloud fraction at coarser resolutions. Our model is non‐Gaussian; it postulates a hidden process for the clear‐sky probability that makes use of the SRE model, EM‐estimation, and optimal (empirical Bayes) spatial prediction of the clear‐sky‐probability process. Measures of prediction uncertainty are also given.     

Identifying Dispersion Effects in Robust Design Experiments—Issues and Improvements

The two experimental methods most commonly used for reducing the effect of noise factors on a response of interest Y aim either to estimate a model of the variability (V(Y), or an associated function), that is transmitted by the noise factors, or to estimate a model of the ratio between the response (Y) and all the control and noise factors involved therein. Both methods aim to determine which control factor conditions minimise the noise factors' effect on the response of interest, and a series of analytical guidelines are established to reach this end. Product array designs allow robustness problems to be solved in both ways, but require a large number of experiments. Thus, practitioners tend to choose more economical designs that only allow them to model the surface response for Y. The general assumption is that both methods would lead to similar conclusions. In this article we present a case that utilises a design based on a product design and for which the conclusions yielded by the two analytical methods are quite different. This example casts doubt on the guidelines that experimental practice follows when using either of the two methods. Based on this example, we show the causes behind these discrepancies and we propose a number of guidelines to help researchers in the design and interpretation of robustness problems when using either of the two methods.