اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدAppropriate Methodology of Statistical Tests According to Prior Probability and Required Objectivity
35
0
0.0
(
0
)
تأليف
Tomokazu Konishi
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
In contrast to its common definition and calculation, interpretation of p-values diverges among statisticians. Since p-value is the basis of various methodologies, this divergence has led to a variety of test methodologies and evaluations of test results. This chaotic situation has complicated the application of tests and decision processes. Here, the origin of the divergence is found in the prior probability of the test. Effects of difference in Pr(H0 = true) on the character of p-values are investigated by comparing real microarray data and its artificial imitations as subjects of Students t-tests. Also, the importance of the prior probability is discussed in terms of the applicability of Bayesian approaches. Suitable methodology is found in accordance with the prior probability and purpose of the test.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Bland and Altman plot method is a graphical plot approach that compares related data sets, supporting the eventual replacement of a measurement method for another one. Perhaps due to its graphical easy output it had been widely applied, however often
misinterpreted. We provide three nested tests: accuracy, precision and agreement, as a means to reach statistical support for the equivalence of measurements. These were based on structural regressions added to the method converting it on inferential statistical criteria, verifying mean equality (accuracy), homoscedasticity (precision), and concordance with a bisector line (agreement). A graphical output illustrating these three tests were added to follow Bland and Altmans principles. Five pairs of data sets from previously published articles that applied the Bland and Altmans principles illustrate this statistical approach. In one case it was demonstrated strict equivalence, three cases showed partial equivalence, and there was one case without equivalence. Here we show a statistical approach added to the graphical outputs that turns the Bland-Altman otherwise graphical subjective interpretation into a clear and objective result and with significance value for a reliable and better communicable decision.
Any Bayesian analysis involves combining information represented through different model components, and when different sources of information are in conflict it is important to detect this. Here we consider checking for prior-data conflict in Bayesi
an models by expanding the prior used for the analysis into a larger family of priors, and considering a marginal likelihood score statistic for the expansion parameter. Consideration of different expansions can be informative about the nature of any conflict, and extensions to hierarchically specified priors and connections with other approaches to prior-data conflict checking are discussed. Implementation in complex situations is illustrated with two applications. The first concerns testing for the appropriateness of a LASSO penalty in shrinkage estimation of coefficients in linear regression. Our method is compared with a recent suggestion in the literature designed to be powerful against alternatives in the exponential power family, and we use this family as the prior expansion for constructing our check. A second application concerns a problem in quantum state estimation, where a multinomial model is considered with physical constraints on the model parameters. In this example, the usefulness of different prior expansions is demonstrated for obtaining checks which are sensitive to different aspects of the prior.
Rejoinder to Statistical Modeling of Spatial Extremes by A. C. Davison, S. A. Padoan and M. Ribatet [arXiv:1208.3378].
For testing two random vectors for independence, we consider testing whether the distance of one vector from a center point is independent from the distance of the other vector from a center point by a univariate test. In this paper we provide condit
ions under which it is enough to have a consistent univariate test of independence on the distances to guarantee that the power to detect dependence between the random vectors increases to one, as the sample size increases. These conditions turn out to be minimal. If the univariate test is distribution-free, the multivariate test will also be distribution-free. If we consider multiple center points and aggregate the center-specific univariate tests, the power may be further improved, and the resulting multivariate test may be distribution-free for specific aggregation methods (if the univariate test is distribution-free). We show that several multivariate tests recently proposed in the literature can be viewed as instances of this general approach.
In this paper, we study the problem of fair classification in the presence of prior probability shifts, where the training set distribution differs from the test set. This phenomenon can be observed in the yearly records of several real-world dataset
s, such as recidivism records and medical expenditure surveys. If unaccounted for, such shifts can cause the predictions of a classifier to become unfair towards specific population subgroups. While the fairness notion called Proportional Equality (PE) accounts for such shifts, a procedure to ensure PE-fairness was unknown. In this work, we propose a method, called CAPE, which provides a comprehensive solution to the aforementioned problem. CAPE makes novel use of prevalence estimation techniques, sampling and an ensemble of classifiers to ensure fair predictions under prior probability shifts. We introduce a metric, called prevalence difference (PD), which CAPE attempts to minimize in order to ensure PE-fairness. We theoretically establish that this metric exhibits several desirable properties. We evaluate the efficacy of CAPE via a thorough empirical evaluation on synthetic datasets. We also compare the performance of CAPE with several popular fair classifiers on real-world datasets like COMPAS (criminal risk assessment) and MEPS (medical expenditure panel survey). The results indicate that CAPE ensures PE-fair predictions, while performing well on other performance metrics.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
