Selecting the Best Exponential Population When the Scale Parameters are Bounded

Consider k (≥ 2) independent exponential populations with different location and scale parameters. Call a population associated with largest of unknown location parameters as the best population. For the goal of selecting the best population, it is established that if the scale parameters are completely unknown, then the indifference-zone probability requirement can not be guaranteed by any single sample decision rule which is just and translation invariant. Under the assumption that the scale parameters are bounded above by a known constant, a single sample selection procedure is proposed for which the indifference-zone probability requirement can be guaranteed. Under the same assumption, 100P*% simultaneous upper confidence intervals for all distances from the largest location parameter are also obtained.     

The simultaneous confidence intervals for all distances from the extreme populations for two-parameter exponential populations based on the multiply type II censored samples

Among k independent two-parameter exponential distributions which have the common scale parameter, the lower extreme population (LEP) is the one with the smallest location parameter and the upper extreme population (UEP) is the one with the largest location parameter. Given a multiply type II censored sample from each of these k independent two-parameter exponential distributions, 14 estimators for the unknown location parameters and the common unknown scale parameter are considered. Fourteen simultaneous confidence intervals (SCIs) for all distances from the extreme populations (UEP and LEP) and from the UEP from these k independent exponential distributions under the multiply type II censoring are proposed. The critical values are obtained by the Monte Carlo method. The optimal SCIs among 14 methods are identified based on the criteria of minimum confidence length for various censoring schemes. The subset selection procedures of extreme populations are also proposed and two numerical examples are given for illustration.     

On lower confidence bounds for pcs in truncated location parameter models

We are concerned with deriving lower confidence bounds for the probability of a correct selection in truncated location-parameter models. Two cases are considered according to whether the scale parameter is known or unknown. For each case, a lower confidence bound for the difference between the best and the second best is obtained. These lower confidence bounds are used to construct lower confidence bounds for the probability of a correct selection. The results are then applied to the problem of seleting the best exponential populationhaving the largest truncated location-parameter. Useful tables are provided for implementing the proposed methods.     

Selection and Ranking Procedures for Type I Extreme Value Populations and a Related Homogeneity Test

Consider k (≥2) independent Type I extreme value populations with unknown location parameters and common known scale parameter. With samples of same size, we study procedures based on the sample means for (1) selecting the population having the largest location parameter, (2) selecting the population having the smallest location parameter, and (3) testing for equality of all the location parameters. We use Bechhofer's indifference-zone and Gupta's subset selection formulations. Tables of constants for implemention are provided based on approximation for the distribution of the standardized sample mean by a generalized Tukey's lambda distribution. Examples are provided for all procedures.     

COMPARISONS AND SELECTION OF TWO-PARAMETER EXPONENTIAL POPULATIONS

For two-parameter exponential populations with the same scale parameter (known or unknown) comparisons are made between the location parameters. This is done by constructing confidence intervals, which can then be used for selection procedures. Comparisons are made with a control, and with the (unknown) “best” or “worst” population. Emphasis is laid on finding approximations to the confidence so that calculations are simple and tables are not necessary. (Since we consider unequal sample sizes, tables for exact values would need to be extensive.)     

SELECTING THE t BEST POPULATIONS — SCALE PARAMETER CASE

Selection from k independent populations of the t (< k) populations with the smallest scale parameters has been considered under the Indifference Zone approach by Bechhofer k Sobel (1954). The same problem has been considered under the Subset Selection approach by Gupta & Sobel (1962a) for the normal variances case and by Carroll, Gupta & Huang (1975) for the more general case of stochastically increasing distributions. This paper uses the Subset Selection approach to place confidence bounds on the probability of selecting all “good” populations, or only “good” populations, for the Case of scale parameters, where a “good” population is defined to have one of the t smallest scale parameters. This is an extension of the location parameter results obtained by Bofinger & Mengersen (1986). Special results are obtained for the case of selecting normal populations based on variances and the necessary tables are presented.     

On a strengthening of the indifference zone approach to a generalized selection goal

The problem of selecting s out of k given compounts which contains at least c of the t best ones is considered. In the case of underlying distribution families with location or scale parameter it is shown that the indiffence zone approach can be strengthened to confidence statements for the parameters of the selected components. These confidence statements are valid over the entire parameter space without decreasing the infimum of the probability of a correct selection.     

Multiple comparisons with a control for exponential location parameters under heteroscedasticity

In this paper, a new design-oriented two-stage two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals, for comparing several exponential populations with control population in terms of location parameters under heteroscedasticity, are proposed. If there is a prior information that the location parameter of k exponential populations are not less than the location parameter of control population, one-sided simultaneous confidence intervals provide more inferential sensitivity than two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals. But the two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals have advantages over the one-sided simultaneous confidence intervals as they provide both lower and upper bounds for the parameters of interest. The proposed design-oriented two-stage two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals provide the benefits of both the two-stage one-sided and two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals. When the additional sample at the second stage may not be available due to the experimental budget shortage or other factors in an experiment, one-stage two-sided confidence intervals are proposed, which combine the advantages of one-stage one-sided and two-sided simultaneous confidence intervals. The critical constants are obtained using the techniques given in Lam [9,10]. These critical constant are compared with the critical constants obtained by Bonferroni inequality techniques and found that critical constant obtained by Lam [9,10] are less conservative than critical constants computed from the Bonferroni inequality technique. Implementation of the proposed simultaneous confidence intervals is demonstrated by a numerical example.     

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.     

On the Optimality and Limitations of Buehler Bounds

In 1957, R.J. Buehler gave a method of constructing honest upper confidence limits for a parameter that are as small as possible subject to a pre‐specified ordering restriction. In reliability theory, these ‘Buehler bounds’ play a central role in setting upper confidence limits for failure probabilities. Despite their stated strong optimality property, Buehler bounds remain virtually unknown to the wider statistical audience. This paper has two purposes. First, it points out that Buehler's construction is not well defined in general. However, a slightly modified version of the Buehler construction is minimal in a slightly weaker, but still compelling, sense. A proof is presented of the optimality of this modified Buehler construction under minimal regularity conditions. Second, the paper demonstrates that Buehler bounds can be expressed as the supremum of Buehler bounds conditional on any nuisance parameters, under very weak assumptions. This result is then used to demonstrate that Buehler bounds reduce to a trivial construction for the location‐scale model. This places important practical limits on the application of Buehler bounds and explains why they are not as well known as they deserve to be.     

Distance Testing for Selecting the Best Population

Consider testing the null hypothesis that a given population has location parameter greater than or equal to the largest location parameter of k competing populations. This paper generalizes tests proposed by Gupta and Bartholomew by considering tests based on p -distances from the parameter estimate to the null parameter space. It is shown that all tests are equivalent when k →∞ for a class of distributions that includes the normal and the uniform. The paper proposes the use of adaptive quantiles. Under suitable assumptions the resulting tests are asymptotically equivalent to the uniformly most powerful test for the case that the location parameters of all but one of the populations are known. The increase in power obtained by using adaptive tests is confirmed by a simulation study.     

Kolmogorov-smirnov confidence sets: the case of more than one sample

For the two-sample problem, distribution-free confidence sets for the shift parameter when the scale parameters are equal and for both the shift and the ratio of scale parameters are derived. Multiple comparisons for the k sample location problem are constructed when all scale parameters are equal. Examples are given. Procedures may be completed with only pencil and paper.

     

SHOULD WE ESTIMATE THE PROBABILITY OF CORRECT SELECTION?

Various authors, given k location parameters, have considered lower confidence bounds on (standardized) dserences between the largest and each of the other k - 1 parameters. They have then used these bounds to put lower confidence bounds on the probability of correct selection (PCS) in the same experiment (as was used for finding the lower bounds on differences). It is pointed out that this is an inappropriate inference procedure. Moreover, if the PCS refers to some later experiment it is shown that if a non-trivial confidence bound is possible then it is already possible to conclude, with greater confidence, that correct selection has occurred in the first experiment. The short answer to the question in the title is therefore ‘No’, but this should be qualified in the case of a Bayesian analysis.     

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.     

Consistency of completely outlier-adjusted simultaneous redescending M-estimators of location and scale

This paper gives conditions for the consistency of simultaneous redescending M-estimators for location and scale. The consistency postulates the uniqueness of the parameters μ and σ, which are defined analogously to the estimations by using the population distribution function instead of the empirical one. The uniqueness of these parameters is no matter of course, because redescending ψ- and χ-functions, which define the parameters, cannot be chosen in a way that the parameters can be considered as the result of a common minimizing problem where the sum of ρ-functions of standardized residuals is to be minimized. The parameters arise from two minimizing problems where the result of one problem is a parameter of the other one. This can give different solutions. Proceeding from a symmetrical unimodal distribution and the usual symmetry assumptions for ψ and χ leads, in most but not in all cases, to the uniqueness of the parameters. Under this and some other assumptions, we can also prove the consistency of the according M-estimators, although these estimators are usually not unique even when the parameters are. The present article also serves as a basis for a forthcoming paper, which is concerned with a completely outlier-adjusted confidence interval for μ. So we introduce a ñ where data points far away from the bulk of the data are not counted at all.     

Recurrence relations for single and product moments of order statistics from a generalized half logistic distribution with applications to inference

In this paper, we derive several recurrence relations satisfied by the single and product moments of order statistics from a generalized half logistic distribution. These generalize the corresponding results for the half logistic distribution established by Balakrishnan (1985). The relations established in this paper will enable one to compute the single and product moments of all order statistics for all sample sizes in a simple recursive manner; this may be done for any choice of the shape parameter k. These moments can then be used to determine the best linear unbiased estimators of location and scale parameters from complete as well as Type-I1 censored samples.     

Linear estimation for the extended exponential power distribution

Tiao and Lund [The use of OLUMV estimators in inference robustness studies of the location parameter of a class of symmetric distributions. J Amer Statist Assoc. 1970;65(329):370–386] tabulated the coefficients of the best linear unbiased estimators (BLUEs) of location and scale for a particular family of symmetric distributions. This family was a reparameterization of the extended exponential power distribution (EEPD) with the shape parameter restricted to be greater than or equal to one. In this work, we consider the BLU estimation of the location and scale parameters of the EEPD when the shape parameter is one-third and one-half. We obtain closed-form expressions for the single and product moments of the order statistics when the shape parameter is in general in the form of a reciprocal of an integer. These expressions are then used to determine the BLUEs and the corresponding variances for complete samples of size 20 and less. We consider some other linear estimators of the location and scale parameters and then compare them with the BLUEs. Finally, we present a numerical example to illustrate the developed results.     

A comparison of estimation techniques for the three parameter pareto distribution

This paper compares minimum distance estimation with best linear unbiased estimation to determine which technique provides the most accurate estimates for location and scale parameters as applied to the three parameter Pareto distribution. Two minimum distance estimators are developed for each of the three distance measures used (Kolmogorov, Cramer‐von Mises, and Anderson‐Darling) resulting in six new estimators. For a given sample size 6 or 18 and shape parameter 1(1)4, the location and scale parameters are estimated. A Monte Carlo technique is used to generate the sample sets. The best linear unbiased estimator and the six minimum distance estimators provide parameter estimates based on each sample set. These estimates are compared using mean square error as the evaluation tool. Results show that the best linear unbaised estimator provided more accurate estimates of location and scale than did the minimum estimators tested.     

Estimation of Pr(X < Y) Using Record Values in the One and Two Parameter Exponential Distributions

We consider the problem of estimating the stress-strength reliability when the available data is in the form of record values. The one parameter and two parameters exponential distribution are considered. In the case of two parameters exponential distributions we considered the case where the location parameter is common and the case where the scale parameter is common. The maximum likelihood estimators and the associated confidence intervals are derived.     

Approximate conditional inference and the linear functional model

Approximate conditional inference is developed for the slope parameter of the linear functional model with two variables. It is shown that the model can be transformed so that the slope parameter becomes an angle and nuisance parameters are radial distances. If the nuisance parameters are known an exact confidence interval based on a location-type conditional distribution is available for the angle. More gen¬erally, confidence distributions are used to average the conditional distribution over the nuisance parameters yielding an approximate conditional confidence interval that reflects the precision indicated by the data. An example is analyzed.