Hypothesis Testing Incorporating a Preliminary Test of Significance
纳入预先显著性检验的假设检验AI 解读 ↓
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。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究正态均值检验中的预检验与功效比较,未明确涉及所列经济计量应用或数据结构,故暂不分类。
反馈分类问题纳入预先显著性检验的假设检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Suppose that independent samples are available from two normal populations with means μ1 and μ2 and known variances. It is desired to test H: μ1 =0. A possible preliminary test procedure in this case consists of first testing μ1 = μ2 and then testing H using either the sample mean from the first population or the pooled sample mean depending on the outcome of the test regarding equality of μ1 and μ2. This procedure is shown to be biased. A power comparison of this procedure with the generalized likelihood ratio test of H indicates that the latter test is more powerful in a fairly extensive parametric region. It is noted that biasedness is frequently encountered in preliminary test procedures. In light of the example, it is recommended that power comparisons be made between such procedures and any available unbiased tests to ascertain whether extensive power loss regions exist or not.