Short confidence intervals for variance components

Four approximate methods are proposed to construct confidence intervals for the estimation of variance components in unbalanced mixed models. The first three methods are modifications of the Wald, arithmetic and harmonic mean procedures, see Harville and Fenech (1985), while the fourth is an adaptive approach, combining the arithmetic and harmonic mean procedures. The performances of the proposed methods were assessed by a Monte Carlo simulation study. It was found that the intervals based on Wald's method maintained the nominal confidence levels across all designs and values of the parameters under study. On the other hand, the arithmetic (harmonic) mean method performed well for small (large) values of the variance component, relative to the error variance component. The adaptive procedure performed rather well except for extremely unbalanced designs. Further, compared with equal tails intervals, the intervals which use special tables, e.g., Table 678 of Tate and Klett (1959), provided adequate coverage while having much shorter lengths and are thus recommended for use in practice.     

Adaptive interval estimation in one-way random effects models

Two-stage procedures are introduced to control the width and coverage (validity) of confidence intervals for the estimation of the mean, the between groups variance component and certain ratios of the variance components in one-way random effects models. The procedures use the pilot sample data to estimate an “optimal” group size and then proceed to determine the number of groups by a stopping rule. Such sampling plans give rise to unbalanced data, which are consequently analyzed by the harmonic mean method. Several asymptotic results concerning the proposed procedures are given along with simulation results to assess their performance in moderate sample size situations. The proposed procedures were found to effectively control the width and probability of coverage of the resulting confidence intervals in all cases and were also found to be robust in the presence of missing observations. From a practical point of view, the procedures are illustrated using a real data set and it is shown that the resulting unbalanced designs tend to require smaller sample sizes than is needed in a corresponding balanced design where the group size is arbitrarily pre-specified.     

Tests and Confidence Intervals for an Extended Variance Component Using the Modified Likelihood Ratio Statistic

Abstract.  The large deviation modified likelihood ratio statistic is studied for testing a variance component equal to a specified value. Formulas are presented in the general balanced case, whereas in the unbalanced case only the one-way random effects model is studied. Simulation studies are presented, showing that the normal approximation to the large deviation modified likelihood ratio statistic gives confidence intervals for variance components with coverage probabilities very close to the nominal confidence coefficient.     

A Comparison of Estimation Methods on the Coverage Probability of Satterthwaite Confidence Intervals for Assay Precision with Unbalanced Data

Construction of closed-form confidence intervals on linear combinations of variance components were developed generically for balanced data and studied mainly for one-way and two-way random effects analysis of variance models. The Satterthwaite approach is easily generalized to unbalanced data and modified to increase its coverage probability. They are applied on measures of assay precision in combination with (restricted) maximum likelihood and Henderson III Type 1 and 3 estimation. Simulations of interlaboratory studies with unbalanced data and with small sample sizes do not show superiority of any of the possible combinations of estimation methods and Satterthwaite approaches on three measures of assay precision. However, the modified Satterthwaite approach with Henderson III Type 3 estimation is often preferred above the other combinations.     

Generalized staggered nested designs for variance components estimation

Staggered nested experimental designs are the most popular class of unbalanced nested designs in practical fields. The most important features of the staggered nested design are that it has a very simple open-ended structure and each sum of squares in the analysis of variance has almost the same degrees of freedom. Based on the features, a class of unbalanced nested designs that is a generalization of the staggered nested design is proposed in this paper. Formulae for the estimation of variance components and their sums are provided. Comparing the variances of the estimators to the staggered nested designs, it is found that some of the generalized staggered nested designs are more efficient than the traditional staggered nested design in estimating some of the variance components and their sums. An example is provided for illustration.     

Confidence intervals for variance components in unbalanced one-way random effects model using non-normal distributions

In scenarios where the variance of a response variable can be attributed to two sources of variation, a confidence interval for a ratio of variance components gives information about the relative importance of the two sources. For example, if measurements taken from different laboratories are nine times more variable than the measurements taken from within the laboratories, then 90% of the variance in the responses is due to the variability amongst the laboratories and 10% of the variance in the responses is due to the variability within the laboratories. Assuming normally distributed sources of variation, confidence intervals for variance components are readily available. In this paper, however, simulation studies are conducted to evaluate the performance of confidence intervals under non-normal distribution assumptions. Confidence intervals based on the pivotal quantity method, fiducial inference, and the large-sample properties of the restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimator are considered. Simulation results and an empirical example suggest that the REML-based confidence interval is favored over the other two procedures in unbalanced one-way random effects model.     

A note on fiducial generalized pivots for in one-way heteroscedastic ANOVA with random effects

The paper deals with generalized confidence intervals for the between-group variance in one-way heteroscedastic (unbalanced) ANOVA with random effects. The approach used mimics the standard one applied in mixed linear models with two variance components, where interval estimators are based on a minimal sufficient statistic derived after an initial reduction by the principle of invariance. A minimal sufficient statistic under heteroscedasticity is found to resemble its homoscedastic counterpart and further analogies between heteroscedastic and homoscedastic cases lead us to two classes of fiducial generalized pivots for the between-group variance. The procedures suggested formerly by Wimmer and Witkovský [Between group variance component interval estimation for the unbalanced heteroscedastic one-way random effects model, J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 73 (2003), pp. 333–346] and Li [Comparison of confidence intervals on between group variance in unbalanced heteroscedastic one-way random models, Comm. Statist. Simulation Comput. 36 (2007), pp. 381–390] are found to belong to these two classes. We comment briefly on some of their properties that were not mentioned in the original papers. In addition, properties of another particular generalized pivot are considered.     

Approximate confidence intervals for a ratio of two variance components

New approximate confidence intervals for the ratio of two variance components in an unbalanced mixed .linear model with a single set of random effects are proposed. Contrary to the confidence intervals known in the literature the new intervals preserve the confidence coefficient and cover the exact confidence interval which, however, is not easy to establish as it requires the solution of complicated nonlinear equations.     

Confidence intervals and tests on the variance ratio in random models with two variance components

The LM test is modified to test any value of the ratio of two variance components in a mixed effects linear model with two variance components. The test is exact, so it can be used to construct exact confidence intervals on this ratio.Exact Neyman-Pearson (NP) tests on the variance ratio are described.Their powers provide attainable upper bounds on powers of tests on the variance ratio.Efficiencies of LM tests, which include ANOVA tests, and NP tests are compared for unbalanced, random, one-way ANOVA models.Confidence intervals corresponding to LM tests and NP tests are described.     

Chisquared and related inducing pivot variables: an application to orthogonal mixed models

Abstract

We use chi-squared and related pivot variables to induce probability measures for model parameters, obtaining some results that will be useful on the induced densities. As illustration we considered mixed models with balanced cross nesting and used the algebraic structure to derive confidence intervals for the variance components. A numerical application is presented.     

Inferences on the intraclass correlation coefficients in the unbalanced two-way random effects model with interaction

In this paper, the hypothesis testing and interval estimation for the intraclass correlation coefficients are considered in a two-way random effects model with interaction. Two particular intraclass correlation coefficients are described in a reliability study. The tests and confidence intervals for the intraclass correlation coefficients are developed when the data are unbalanced. One approach is based on the generalized p-value and generalized confidence interval, the other is based on the modified large-sample idea. These two approaches simplify to the ones in Gilder et al. [2007. Confidence intervals on intraclass correlation coefficients in a balanced two-factor random design. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 137, 1199–1212] when the data are balanced. Furthermore, some statistical properties of the generalized confidence intervals are investigated. Finally, some simulation results to compare the performance of the modified large-sample approach with that of the generalized approach are reported. The simulation results indicate that the modified large-sample approach performs better than the generalized approach in the coverage probability and expected length of the confidence interval.     

Inferences on the reliability in balanced and unbalanced one-way random models

In this article, the hypothesis testing and interval estimation for the reliability parameter are considered in balanced and unbalanced one-way random models. The tests and confidence intervals for the reliability parameter are developed using the concepts of generalized p-value and generalized confidence interval. Furthermore, some simulation results are presented to compare the performances between the proposed approach and the existing approach. For balanced models, the simulation results indicate that the proposed approach can provide satisfactory coverage probabilities and performs better than the existing approaches across the wide array of scenarios, especially for small sample sizes. For unbalanced models, the simulation results show that the two proposed approaches perform more satisfactorily than the existing approach in most cases. Finally, the proposed approaches are illustrated using two real examples.     

Inferences on the Among-Group Variance Component in Unbalanced Heteroscedastic One-Fold Nested Design

This article studies the hypothesis testing and interval estimation for the among-group variance component in unbalanced heteroscedastic one-fold nested design. Based on the concepts of generalized p-value and generalized confidence interval, tests and confidence intervals for the among-group variance component are developed. Furthermore, some simulation results are presented to compare the performance of the proposed approach with those of existing approaches. It is found that the proposed approach and one of the existing approaches can maintain the nominal confidence level across a wide array of scenarios, and therefore are recommended to use in practical problems. Finally, a real example is illustrated.     

Interval estimation of parameters in an unbalanced mixed two-fold nested classification-the last-stage uniformity case

A procedure for the construction of exact simultaneous confidence intervals on functions of the fixed-effects parameters and on functions of variance components in an unbalanced, mixed, two-fold nested classification is introduced. The type of model considered in this paper enables the construction of such intervals to be based on the corresponding ANOVA table using its mean square ratios.     

Estimating standard error of intra-class correlation coefficients up to three level unbalanced nested clinical trials

ABSTRACT

Very often researchers plan a balanced design for cluster randomization clinical trials in conducting medical research, but unavoidable circumstances lead to unbalanced data. By adopting three or more levels of nested designs, they usually ignore the higher level of nesting and consider only two levels, this situation leads to underestimation of variance at higher levels. While calculating the sample size for three-level nested designs, in order to achieve desired power, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) at individual level as well as higher levels need to be considered and must be provided along with respective standard errors. In the present paper, the standard errors of analysis of variance (ANOVA) estimates of ICCs for three-level unbalanced nested design are derived. To conquer the strong appeal of distributional assumptions, balanced design, equality of variances between clusters and large sample, general expressions for standard errors of ICCs which can be deployed in unbalanced cluster randomization trials are postulated. The expressions are evaluated on real data as well as highly unbalanced simulated data.     

Random balanced resampling: A new method for estimating variance components in unbalanced designs

Variance components in factorial designs with balanced data are commonly estimated by equating mean squares to expected mean squares. For unbalanced data, the usual extensions of this approach are the Henderson methods, which require formulas that are rather involved. Alternatively, maximum likelihood estimation based on normality has been proposed. Although the algorithm for maximum likelihood is computationally complex, programs exist in some statistical packages. This article introduces a simpler method, that of creating a balanced data set by resampling from the original one. Revised formulas for expected mean squares are presented for the two-way case; they are easily generalized to larger factorial designs. The results of a number of simulation studies indicate that, in certain types of designs, the proposed method has performance advantages over both the Henderson Method I and maximum likelihood estimators.     

Multiphase experiments with at least one later laboratory phase. II. Nonorthogonal designs

Principles and laws that apply to nonorthogonal multiphase experiments are developed and illustrated using examples that are nonorthogonal but structure‐balanced, not structure, but first‐order, balanced or unbalanced, thus exposing the differences between the different design types. The design of such experiments using standard designs, a catalogue of designs and computer searches is exemplified. Factor–allocation diagrams are employed to depict the allocations in the examples, and used in producing the anatomies of designs or, when possible, the related skeleton‐analysis‐of‐variance tables, to assess the properties of designs. The formulation of mixed models based on them is also described. Tools used for structure‐balanced experiments are also shown to be applicable to those experiments that are not.     

Performance of Confidence Intervals in Regression Models with Unbalanced One-Fold Nested Error Structures

Abstract

In this article we consider the problem of constructing confidence intervals for a linear regression model with unbalanced nested error structure. A popular approach is the likelihood-based method employed by PROC MIXED of SAS. In this article, we examine the ability of MIXED to produce confidence intervals that maintain the stated confidence coefficient. Our results suggest that intervals for the regression coefficients work well, but intervals for the variance component associated with the primary level cannot be recommended. Accordingly, we propose alternative methods for constructing confidence intervals on the primary level variance component. Computer simulation is used to compare the proposed methods. A numerical example and SAS code are provided to demonstrate the methods.     

Alternative Confidence Intervals on Variance Components in a Simple Regression Model with a Balanced Two-Fold Nested Error Structure

In applications using a linear regression model with a balanced two-fold nested error structure, interest focuses on inferences concerning variability of the effects associated with the levels of nesting. This article proposes confidence intervals on the variance components associated with the primary and secondary levels in the model. In order to construct the confidence intervals we use a modified large sample method, generalized inference method, and Satterthwaite approximation. Computer simulation is performed to compare the proposed confidence intervals. A numerical example is provided to demonstrate the intervals.     

Comparison of designs for the three-fold nested random model

The quality of estimation of variance components depends on the design used as well as on the unknown values of the variance components. In this article, three designs are compared, namely, the balanced, staggered, and inverted nested designs for the three-fold nested random model. The comparison is based on the so-called quantile dispersion graphs using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and maximum likelihood (ML) estimates of the variance components. It is demonstrated that the staggered nested design gives more stable estimates of the variance component for the highest nesting factor than the balanced design. The reverse, however, is true in case of lower nested factors. A comparison between ANOVA and ML estimation of the variance components is also made using each of the aforementioned designs.