跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要属于序贯决策与估计最优性的一般理论,未提供所列经济或金融细分方向的直接依据。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Y. Vardi

某些序贯估计量的渐近最优性

研究问题
在抽样成本随样本量线性增长时,序贯均值估计能否对所有参数取得负遗憾,且一致有界遗憾是否意味着接近贝叶斯最优?
方法与思路
作者在独立同分布、均值为充分统计量的指数型分布设定中,结合平方损失与抽样成本,在渐近和光滑性条件下分析决策风险。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,在所述渐近意义及光滑性条件下,普遍严格负遗憾不可实现,而一致有界遗憾程序相对相应贝叶斯程序仅有有界损失差距。
阅读关注点
应核对渐近参数、光滑性和先验序列的限制,尤其核实遗憾基准的定义及其与摘要前述最小风险表达的关系。
阅读边界
所给 OpenAlex 索引摘要未注明稿件版本;摘要中的遗憾基准与前述最小风险表达不一致,须核对原文,不能据此推导公式。

原文摘要

We give a decision-theoretic justification of a heuristic principle suggested by Robbins. Suppose a sequence $X_1, X_2, \cdots$ of independent random variables can be observed; they are known to be identically distributed with unknown mean and variance $u, \sigma^2(u)$ respectively. We assume further that the common distribution is of exponential type, so that the sample mean $\bar{X}$ is a sufficient statistic. The problem is to estimate $u$ taking into account the cost of sampling, which is assumed to be linear in the sample size, $n$. For the case of a fixed-size sample, with squared-error loss function, the minimum risk (expected loss) is obtained, after rescaling if necessary, as $\min_nE(n + A(\bar{X} - u)^2) = \min_n(n + A\sigma^2(u)/n) = 2A^{\frac{1}{2}}\sigma(u)$, and is attained at $n_0 = A^{\frac{1}{2}}\sigma(u)$. Since $u$ is unknown, this optimum value is not available; and for any fixed $n$, if $\sigma(u)$ is unbounded, the risk $n + A\sigma^2(u)/n$ can be much larger than $2A^{\frac{1}{2}}\sigma(u)$. For calibration of the performance of sequential stopping rules, Robbins advocated consideration of the "regret" $E(n + A(\bar{X} - u)^2) - A^{\frac{1}{2}}\sigma(u),$ and several authors have constructed procedures with uniformly bounded regret. Two questions arise, which we settle here (in a certain asymptotic sense, and after making certain smoothness assumptions). First, can any procedure have strictly negative regret, for all $u$? Second, if a procedure has uniformly bounded regret, is it necessarily close to being optimum, in the sense that for each (suitably smooth) sequence of prior distributions on $u$, is it only boundedly worse than the corresponding sequence of Bayes procedures? Our answers are no, and yes, respectively. Several examples are discussed, and analogies pointed out with the fixed-sample-size concepts of the asymptotic optimality of maximum-likelihood estimates, and the super-efficiency phenomenon.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文