A restricted subset selection procedure for Weibull populations

Consider k(k ≥ 2) two-parameter Weibull populations. We want to select a subset of the populations not exceeding m in size such that the subset contains at least ? of the t best populations. We have proposed a procedure which uses either the maximum likelihood estimators or ‘simplified’ linear estimators of the parameters. The estimators are based on type II censored data. The ranking of the populations is done by comparing their reliabilities at a certain fixed time. In selected cases the constants for the procedure are tabulated using Monte Carlo methods.     

Some multiple decision problems in analysis of variance

In most practical situations to which the analysis of variance tests are applied, they do not supply the information that the experimenter aims at. If, for example, in one-way ANOVA the hypothesis is rejected in actual application of the F-test, the resulting conclusion that the true means θ₁,…,θ_k are not all equal, would by itself usually be insufficient to satisfy the experimenter. In fact his problems would begin at this stage. The experimenter may desire to select the “best” population or a subset of the “good” populations; he may like to rank the populations in order of “goodness” or he may like to draw some other inferences about the parameters of interest.

The extensive literature on selection and ranking procedures depends heavily on the use of independence between populations (block, treatments, etc.) in the analysis of variance. In practical applications, it is desirable to drop this assumption or independence and consider cases more general than the normal.

In the present paper, we derive a method to construct optimal (in some sense) selection procedures to select a nonempty subset of the k populations containing the best population as ranked in terms of θ_i’s which control the size of the selected subset and which maximizes the minimum average probability of selecting the best. We also consider the usual selection procedures in one-way ANOVA based on the generalized least squares estimates and apply the method to two-way layout case. Some examples are discussed and some results on comparisons with other procedures are also obtained.     

A modified subset selection formulation with special reference to one-way and two-way layout experiments

The usual formulation of subset selection due to Gupta (1956) requires a minimum guaranteed probability of a correct selection. The modified formulation of the present paper includes an additional requirement that the expected number of the nonbest populations be bounded above by a specified constant when the best and the next best populations are ‘sufficiently’ apart. A class of procedures is defined and the determination of the minimum sample size required is discussed. The specific problems discussed for normal populations include selection in terms of means and variances, and selection in terms of treatment effects in a two-way layout.     

A subset selection procedure for multinomial distributions

A subset selection procedure is developed for selecting a subset containing the multinomial population that has the highest value of a certain linear combination of the multinomial cell probabilities; such population is called the ‘best’. The multivariate normal large sample approximation to the multinomial distribution is used to derive expressions for the probability of a correct selection, and for the threshold constant involved in the procedure. The procedure guarantees that the probability of a correct selection is at least at a pre-assigned level. The proposed procedure is an extension of Gupta and Sobel's [14] selection procedure for binomials and of Bakir's [2] restrictive selection procedure for multinomials. One illustration of the procedure concerns population income mobility in four countries: Peru, Russia, South Africa and the USA. Analysis indicates that Russia and Peru fall in the selected subset containing the best population with respect to income mobility from poverty to a higher-income status. The procedure is also applied to data concerning grade distribution for students in a certain freshman class.     

Multiple comparisons with ‘best’ for multivariate normal populations

Comparisons of multivariate normal populations are made using a mul-tivariate approach (instead of reducing the problem to a univariate one). A rather negative finding is that, for comparisons with the ‘best’ of each variate, repeated univariate comparisons appear to be almost as efficient as multivariate comparisons, at least for the bivariate case and, under certain circumstances, for higher dimensional cases. Investigations are done on comparisons with the ‘MAX-best’ population (that one having the largest maximum of the marginal means), the ‘MIN-best’ (having the largest minimum) and the ‘O-best’ (being closest to largest in all marginal means). Detailed results are given for the bivariate normal with extensions indicated for the multivariate.     

Analysis of reliability characteristics in the acceptance sampling tests

Until now, various acceptance reliability sampling plans have been developed based on different life tests of items. However, the statistical effect of the acceptance sampling tests on the reliability characteristic of the lots accepted in the test has not been appropriately addressed. In this paper, we deal with an acceptance reliability sampling plan under a ‘general framework’ and discuss the corresponding statistical effect of the acceptance sampling tests. The lifetime of the population before the acceptance test and that of population ‘conditional on the acceptance’ in the sampling test are stochastically compared. The improvement of reliability characteristics of the population conditional on the acceptance in the sampling test is precisely analyzed.     

A Revisit to the Behrens–Fisher Problem: Comparison of Five Test Methods

We revisit the well-known Behrens–Fisher problem and apply a newly developed ‘Computational Approach Test’ (CAT) to test the equality of two population means where the populations are assumed to be normal with unknown and possibly unequal variances. An advantage of the CAT is that it does not require the explicit knowledge of the sampling distribution of the test statistic. The CAT is then compared with three widely accepted tests—Welch–Satterthwaite test (WST), Cochran–Cox test (CCT), ‘Generalized p-value’ test (GPT)—and a recently suggested test based on the jackknife procedure, called Singh–Saxena–Srivastava test (SSST). Further, model robustness of these five tests are studied when the data actually came from t-distributions, but wrongly perceived as normal ones. Our detailed study based on a comprehensive simulation indicate some interesting results including the facts that the GPT is quite conservative, and the SSST is not as good as it has been claimed in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, the trends observed in our study have not been reported earlier in the existing literature.     

Model of Combined Prevision: An Application of the Monthly Series of Dengue Notifications in the State of Pernambuco

In this paper we state and justify a two-stage sampling procedure for selecting a subset of size m containing the t best of k independent normal populations, when the ranking parameters are the population means. We do not assume that the variances of the populations are known or equal. Discrete event simulation studies are often concerned with choosing one or more system designs which are best in some sense. We present empirical results from a typical simulation application for which the observations are not normally distributed.     

A TEST OF HOMOGENEITY AGAINST SCALE ALTERNATIVES USING SUBSAMPLE EXTREMA1

In this paper a new class of non-parametric tests for testing homogeneity of several populations against scale alternatives is proposed. For this, independent samples of fixed sizes are drawn from each population and from these samples, all possible sub-samples of the same size are drawn and their maxima and minima are computed. Using these extreme the class of tests is obtained. Tests of this type have been offered for the two-sample slippage problem by Kochar (1978). Under certain conditions, this class of tests is shown to be consistent against ‘difference in scale’ alternatives. The test has been compared with Bhapkar's V-test (1961), Deshpande's D-test (1965), Sugiura's D_rs-test (1965) and with a classical test given by Lehmann (1959, pp. 273–275). It is shown that some members of this proposed class of tests are more efficient than the first three tests in the case of uniform, Laplace and normal distributions, when the number of populations compared is small.     

On some optimal selection procedures for weibull populations

Consider k (k >(>)2) Weibull populations. We shall derive a method of constructing optimal selection procedures to select a subset of the k populations containing the best population which control the size of the selected subset and which maximises the minimum probability of making a correct selection. Procedures and results are derived for the case when sample sizes are unequal. Some tables and figures are given at the end of this paper.     

A decision-theoretic approach to subset selection

The multiple decision problem of selecting a random non-empty subset of populations, out of k populations, that are close in some sense to the best population is considered in a decision-theoretic framework. Uniformly optimal procedures for non-negative semi-additive loss are derived. A class of likelihood-ratio type of procedures is shown to be admissible for monotone additive loss.     

A MORE GENERAL CRITERION FOR SUBSET SELECTION IN MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION

ABSTRACT

In this article, we propose a more general criterion called S_p -criterion, for subset selection in the multiple linear regression Model. Many subset selection methods are based on the Least Squares (LS) estimator of β, but whenever the data contain an influential observation or the distribution of the error variable deviates from normality, the LS estimator performs ‘poorly’ and hence a method based on this estimator (for example, Mallows’ C_p -criterion) tends to select a ‘wrong’ subset. The proposed method overcomes this drawback and its main feature is that it can be used with any type of estimator (either the LS estimator or any robust estimator) of β without any need for modification of the proposed criterion. Moreover, this technique is operationally simple to implement as compared to other existing criteria. The method is illustrated with examples.     

LBI tests for the detection of compound normal distribution in control and treatment populations

Independent samples are drawn from control and treatment populations with normal and compound normal distributions respectively. We derive the locally best invariant (LBI) tests through Wijsman’s representation for the detection of mixture departures from the normal distribution. These tests may be viewed as tests for the equality of control and treatment populations. Further, they are optimally robust for the model considered by Durairajan and Raman (1994).     

Least significant spacing for ‘one versus the rest’ normal populations

Consider sample means from k(≥2) normal populations where the variances and sample sizes are equal. The problem is to find the ‘least significant difference’ or ‘spacing’ (LSS) between the two largest means, so that if an observed spacing is larger we have confidence 1 - α that the population with largest sample mean also has the largest population mean.

When the variance is known it is shown that the maximum LSS occurs when k = 2, provided a < .2723. In other words, for any value of k we may use the usual (one-tailed) least significant difference to demonstrate that one population has a population mean greater than (or equal to) the rest.

When the variance is estimated bounds are obtained for the confidence which indicate that this last result is approximately correct.     

Selection from uniform populations based on sample mtdranges and an associated estimation after selection

Selection of the uniform population having the largest location parameter (point of symmetry) is considered using both the indifference zone and subset selection formulations. For the indifference zone rule selecting one of the population as the best, estimation of the parameter of the selected population is considered in the case of two given populations.     

Testing hypotheses about medical test accuracy: considerations for design and inference

Developing new medical tests and identifying single biomarkers or panels of biomarkers with superior accuracy over existing classifiers promotes lifelong health of individuals and populations. Before a medical test can be routinely used in clinical practice, its accuracy within diseased and non-diseased populations must be rigorously evaluated. We introduce a method for sample size determination for studies designed to test hypotheses about medical test or biomarker sensitivity and specificity. We show how a sample size can be determined to guard against making type I and/or type II errors by calculating Bayes factors from multiple data sets simulated under null and/or alternative models. The approach can be implemented across a variety of study designs, including investigations into one test or two conditionally independent or dependent tests. We focus on a general setting that involves non-identifiable models for data when true disease status is unavailable due to the nonexistence of or undesirable side effects from a perfectly accurate (i.e. ‘gold standard’) test; special cases of the general method apply to identifiable models with or without gold-standard data. Calculation of Bayes factors is performed by incorporating prior information for model parameters (e.g. sensitivity, specificity, and disease prevalence) and augmenting the observed test-outcome data with unobserved latent data on disease status to facilitate Gibbs sampling from posterior distributions. We illustrate our methods using a thorough simulation study and an application to toxoplasmosis.     

On sequentially rejective subset selection procedures

A technique for selection procedures, called sequential rejection, is investigated. It is shown that this technique is posssible to apply to certain selection goals of the "all or nothing" type, i.e. "selecting a subset containing all good populations" or "selecting a subset containing no bad population". The analogy with existing sequential techniques in the general theory of simultaneous statistical inference is pointed out.     

An essentially complete class of multiple decision procedures

Let π₁,…, π_k represent k(?2) independent populations. The quality of the ith population π_i is characterized by a real-valued parameter θ_i, usually unknown. We define the best population in terms of a measure of separation between θ_i's. A selection of a subset containing the best population is called a correct selection (CS). We restrict attention to rules for which the size of the selected subset is controlled at a given point and the infimum of the probability of correct selection over the parameter space is maximized. The main theorem deals with construction of an essentially complete class of selection rules of the above type. Some classical subset selection rules are shown to belong to this class.     

Subset selection procedures for ΔP-superior populations

In some ranking and selection problems it is reasonable to consider any population which is inferior but sufficiently close to the best (t-th best) as acceptable. Under this assumption, this paper studies classes of procedures to meet two possible goals. A and B. Goal A is to select a subset which contains only good populations, while Goal B is of a screening nature and requires selection of a subset of size not exceeding m (1 ≤ m ≤ k) and containing at least one good population. In each case results loading to the determination of the sample size required to attain the goals above with prespecified probability are obtained. Properties of the procedures are discussed.     

On estimating the mean of the selected population with unknown variance

This paper compares four estimators of the mean of the selected population from two normal populations with unknown means and common but unknown variance. The selection procedure is that the population yielding the largest sample mean is selected. The four estimators considered are invariant under both location and scale transformations. The bias and mean square errors of the four estimators are computed and compared. The conclusions are close to those reported by Dahiya ‘1974’, even for small sample sizes