A Nonstochastic Interpretation of Reported Significance Levels
报告显著性水平的非随机解释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:摘要讨论一般显著性水平与残差置换的解释,未限定因果、面板、宏观或金融模型,现有领域细分的证据不足。
报告显著性水平的非随机解释AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Tests of significance are often made in situations where the standard assumptions underlying the probability calculations do not hold. As a result, the reported significance levels become difficult to interpret. This article sketches an alternative interpretation of a reported significance level, valid in considerable generality. This level locates the given data set within the spectrum of other data sets derived from the given one by an appropriate class of transformations. If the null hypothesis being tested holds, the derived data sets should be equivalent to the original one. Thus, a small reported significance level indicates an unusual data set. This development parallels that of randomization tests, but there is a crucial technical difference: our approach involves permuting observed residuals; the classical randomization approach involves permuting unobservable, or perhaps nonexistent, stochastic disturbance terms.