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:摘要明确研究随机化处理效应推断及个体效应分布的分位数和阈值比例。

反馈分类问题

Randomisation inference beyond the sharp null: bounded null hypotheses and quantiles of individual treatment effects

超越尖锐零假设的随机化推断:有界零假设与个体处理效应分位数

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
Devin Caughey
Allan Dafoe
Xinran Li
Luke Miratrix

超越尖锐零假设的随机化推断:有界零假设与个体处理效应分位数

研究问题
随机化推断能否检验允许异质性的同向有界效应零假设,并对个体效应极值、分位数及超过阈值的比例进行推断?
方法与思路
作者分析随机化检验对有界零假设的有效性,通过反演一系列检验构造极值置信区间,并扩展到效应分布推断。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称得到个体效应极值的精确区间及分位数推断,所有效应分位数的区间同时有效,无需额外多重分析校正。
阅读关注点
应核对哪些检验统计量适用于有界零假设、随机分配机制的要求,以及分位数和比例区间的反演与同时有效性证明。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要;具体设计、检验统计量限制及区间信息量未说明,不能认为所有随机化检验都具有这些性质。

原文摘要

Abstract Randomisation inference (RI) is typically interpreted as testing Fisher’s ‘sharp’ null hypothesis that all unit-level effects are exactly zero. This hypothesis is often criticised as restrictive and implausible, making its rejection scientifically uninteresting. We show, however, that many randomisation tests are also valid for a ‘bounded’ null hypothesis under which the unit-level effects are all non-positive (or all non-negative) but are otherwise heterogeneous. In addition to being more plausible a priori, bounded nulls are closely related to substantively important concepts such as monotonicity and Pareto efficiency. Reinterpreting RI in this way expands the range of inferences possible in this framework. We show that exact confidence intervals for the maximum (or minimum) unit-level effect can be obtained by inverting tests for a sequence of bounded nulls. We also generalise RI to cover inference for quantiles of the individual effect distribution as well as for the proportion of individual effects larger (or smaller) than a given threshold. The proposed confidence intervals for all effect quantiles are simultaneously valid, in the sense that no correction for multiple analyses is required. In sum, our reinterpretation and generalisation provide a broader justification for randomisation tests and a basis for exact non-parametric inference for effect quantiles.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文