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:摘要属于一般多重检验与次序统计量理论,可交换依赖并不直接构成网络、干扰或其他所列领域证据。

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
H. Finner
M. Roters

可交换检验统计量下逐步下降与逐步上升多重检验的渐近比较

研究问题
检验统计量具有可交换性而非独立同分布时,逐步下降与逐步上升程序的临界值及次序统计量分布如何比较?
方法与思路
作者研究相关次序统计量的联合与边际分布的渐近关系,在附加分布条件下建立结果,并用反例检验单调性。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,可交换情形可能明显区别于独立情形;论文解释特定逐步上升程序的临界值优势,并量化相关 Bonferroni 界的紧度。
阅读关注点
应核对附加分布条件、反例构造及临界值比较准则,特别确认所述优势是否仅限于指定的对照组多重比较程序。
阅读边界
仅据版本未注明的 OpenAlex 索引摘要,无法给出完整条件或优势幅度;可交换性本身不足以保证摘要中的正面结果。

原文摘要

In this paper interest is focused on some theoretical investigations concerning the comparison of two popular multiple test procedures, so-called step-down and step-up procedures, in terms of their defining critical values. Such procedures can be applied, for example, to multiple comparisons with a control. In the definition of the critical values for these procedures order statistics play a central role. For $k \epsilon N_0$ fixed we consider the joint cumulative distribution function (cdf) $P(Y_{1:n} \leq c_1,\dots, Y_{n-k:n} \leq c_{n-k})$ of the first $n - k$ order statistics and the cdf$P(Y_{n-k:n} \leq c_{n-k})$ of the ($k + 1$)th largest order statistic $Y_{n-k:n}$ of $n$ random variables $Y_1,\dots, Y_n$ belonging to a sequence of exchangeable real-valued random variables. Our interest is focused on the asymptotic behavior of these cdf's and their interrelation if $n$ tends to $\infty$. It turns out that they sometimes behave completely differently compared with the iid case treated in Finner and Roters so that positive results are only possible under additional assumptions concerning the underlying distribution. We consider different sets of assumptions which then allow analogous results for the exchangeable case. Recently, Dalal and Mallows derived a result concerning the monotonicity of a certain set of critical values in connection with the joint cdf of order statistics in the iid case. We give a counterexample for the exchangeable case underlining the difficulties occurring in this situation. As an application we consider the comparison of certain step-down and step-up procedures in multiple comparisons with a control. The results of this paper yield a more theoretical explanation of the superiority of the step-up procedure which has been observed earlier by comparing tables of critical values. As a by-product we are able to quantify the tightness of the Bonferroni inequality in connection with maximum statistics.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文