An asymptotic distribution-free selection procedure for a two-way layout problem

This paper deals with an asymptotic distribution-free subset selection procedure for a two-way layout problem. The treatment effect with the largest unknown value is of interest to us. The block effect is a nuisance parameter in this problem. The proposed procedure is based on the Hodges-Lehmann estimators of location parameters. The asymptotic relative efficiency of the proposed procedure with the normal means procedure is evaluated. It is shown that the proposed procedure has a high efficiency.     

MODELING THE LIFETIME OF LONGITUDINAL ELEMENTS

In the study of the stochastic behaviour of the lifetime of an element as a function of its length, it is often observed that the failure time (or lifetime) decreases as the length increases. In probabilistic terms, such an idea can be expressed as follows. Let T be the lifetime of a specimen of length x, so the survival function, which denotes the probability that an element of length x survives till time t, will be given by S_T (t, x) = P(T > t/α(x), where α(x) is a monotonically decreasing function. In particular, it is often assumed that T has a Weibull distribution. In this paper, we propose a generalization of this Weibull model by assuming that the distribution of T is Generalized gamma (GG). Since the GG model contains the Weibull, Gamma and Lognormal models as special and limiting cases, a GG regression model is an appropriate tool for describing the size effect on the lifetime and for selecting among the embedded models. Maximum likelihood estimates are obtained for the GG regression model with α(x) = cx^b . As a special case this provide an alternative to the usual approach to estimation for the GG distribution which involves reparametrization. Related parametric inference issues are addressed and illustrated using two experimental data sets. Some discussion of censored data is also provided.     

Goodness of fit for thei ordered categories discrete uniform distribution

Goodness of fit for thei ordered categories discrete uniform distribution can be carried out using Pearson's X² _pstatistic and its components. Applications of this technique are considered and comparisons made with recently suggested empirical uniform distribution     

Repeated measurements designs - a review

Any experiment in which one or more of the experimental units is used more than once is called a repeated measurements experiment. The associated design of a repeated measurements experiment is referred to as a repeated measurements design. This review covers some known results on repeated measurements designs. Emphasis is placed on the impact of optimal design theory. Some construction methods for these designs are presented. Hedayat and Afsarinejad (1975) has an extensive bibliography of earlier literature. A bibliography of these designs published after 1974 is provided at the end of this paper.     

Accelerated test system strength models based on Birnbaum–Saunders distribution: a complete Bayesian analysis and comparison

Several models for studies related to tensile strength of materials are proposed in the literature where the size or length component has been taken to be an important factor for studying the specimens’ failure behaviour. An important model, developed on the basis of cumulative damage approach, is the three-parameter extension of the Birnbaum–Saunders fatigue model that incorporates size of the specimen as an additional variable. This model is a strong competitor of the commonly used Weibull model and stands better than the traditional models, which do not incorporate the size effect. The paper considers two such cumulative damage models, checks their compatibility with a real dataset, compares them with some of the recent toolkits, and finally recommends a model, which appears an appropriate one. Throughout the study is Bayesian based on Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation.     

A case–control study relating railroad worker mortality to diesel exhaust exposure using a threshold regression model

A case–control study of lung cancer mortality in U.S. railroad workers in jobs with and without diesel exhaust exposure is reanalyzed using a new threshold regression methodology. The study included 1256 workers who died of lung cancer and 2385 controls who died primarily of circulatory system diseases. Diesel exhaust exposure was assessed using railroad job history from the US Railroad Retirement Board and an industrial hygiene survey. Smoking habits were available from next-of-kin and potential asbestos exposure was assessed by job history review. The new analysis reassesses lung cancer mortality and examines circulatory system disease mortality. Jobs with regular exposure to diesel exhaust had a survival pattern characterized by an initial delay in mortality, followed by a rapid deterioration of health prior to death. The pattern is seen in subjects dying of lung cancer, circulatory system diseases, and other causes. The unique pattern is illustrated using a new type of Kaplan–Meier survival plot in which the time scale represents a measure of disease progression rather than calendar time. The disease progression scale accounts for a healthy-worker effect when describing the effects of cumulative exposures on mortality.     

Quantile dispersion graphs to compare the efficiencies of cluster randomized designs

The purpose of this article is to compare efficiencies of several cluster randomized designs using the method of quantile dispersion graphs (QDGs). A cluster randomized design is considered whenever subjects are randomized at a group level but analyzed at the individual level. A prior knowledge of the correlation existing between subjects within the same cluster is necessary to design these cluster randomized trials. Using the QDG approach, we are able to compare several cluster randomized designs without requiring any information on the intracluster correlation. For a given design, several quantiles of the power function, which are directly related to the effect size, are obtained for several effect sizes. The quantiles depend on the intracluster correlation present in the model. The dispersion of these quantiles over the space of the unknown intracluster correlation is determined, and then depicted by the QDGs. Two applications of the proposed methodology are presented.     

Back to basics: explaining sample size in outcome trials,are statisticians doing a thorough job?

Time to event outcome trials in clinical research are typically large, expensive and high‐profile affairs. Such trials are commonplace in oncology and cardiovascular therapeutic areas but are also seen in other areas such as respiratory in indications like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Their progress is closely monitored and results are often eagerly awaited. Once available, the top line result is often big news, at least within the therapeutic area in which it was conducted, and the data are subsequently fully scrutinized in a series of high‐profile publications. In such circumstances, the statistician has a vital role to play in the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of the trial. In particular, in drug development it is incumbent on the statistician to ensure at the outset that the sizing of the trial is fully appreciated by their medical, and other non‐statistical, drug development team colleagues and that the risk of delivering a statistically significant but clinically unpersuasive result is minimized. The statistician also has a key role in advising the team when, early in the life of an outcomes trial, a lower than anticipated event rate appears to be emerging. This paper highlights some of the important features relating to outcome trial sample sizing and makes a number of simple recommendations aimed at ensuring a better, common understanding of the interplay between sample size and power and the final result required to provide a statistically positive and clinically persuasive outcome. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rejoinder to 'Ahmed, M.S. (1998). A note on regression-type estimators using multiple auxiliary information.'

In the estimators t ₃ , t ₄ , t ₅ of Mukerjee, Rao & Vijayan (1987), b _{y x} and b _{y z} are partial regression coefficients of y on x and z , respectively, based on the smaller sample. With the above interpretation of b _{y x} and b _{y z} in t ₃ , t ₄ , t ₅ , all the calculations in Mukerjee at al. (1987) are correct. In this connection, we also wish to make it explicit that b _{x z} in t ₅ is an ordinary and not a partial regression coefficient. The 'corrected' MSEs of t ₃ , t ₄ , t ₅ , as given in Ahmed (1998 Section 3) are computed assuming that our b _{y x} and b _{y z} are ordinary and not partial regression coefficients. Indeed, we had no intention of giving estimators using the corresponding ordinary regression coefficients which would lead to estimators inferior to those given by Kiregyera (1984). We accept responsibility for any notational confusion created by us and express regret to readers who have been confused by our notation. Finally, in consideration of the above, it may be noted that Tripathi & Ahmed's (1995) estimator t ₀ , quoted also in Ahmed (1998), is no better than t ₅ of Mukerjee at al. (1987).