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:摘要研究一般高斯均值检验及通用似然比推断,未明确对应所列计量领域细分。

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
Robin Dunn
Aaditya Ramdas
Larry Wasserman

高斯模型中的通用似然比检验

研究问题
通用似然比检验具有有限样本有效性,但在高斯均值检验中不同变体的检验水平、功效与置信集大小如何比较?
方法与思路
作者以单位协方差的多维高斯均值检验为比较场景,考察多个通用检验变体,重点分析重复子抽样及非凸环形原假设。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称重复子抽样在所考察变体中有较好的水平与功效表现,并分析置信集形状、半径代价及非凸原假设下的潜在功效优势。
阅读关注点
应核对分割和重复子抽样的具体构造、有效性与功效分析各自的条件,以及置信集半径比较和非凸检验的适用范围。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要,无法判断比较结果对未知协方差或非高斯数据的适用性;所述最佳变体与功效优势限于考察范围。

原文摘要

Summary The classical likelihood ratio test based on the asymptotic chi-squared distribution of the log-likelihood is one of the fundamental tools of statistical inference. A recent universal likelihood ratio test approach based on sample splitting provides valid hypothesis tests and confidence sets in any setting for which we can compute the split likelihood ratio statistic, or, more generally, an upper bound on the null maximum likelihood. The universal likelihood ratio test is valid in finite samples and without regularity conditions. This test empowers statisticians to construct tests in settings for which no valid hypothesis test previously existed. For the simple, but fundamental, case of testing the population mean of $d$-dimensional Gaussian data with an identity covariance matrix, the classical likelihood ratio test itself applies. Thus, this setting serves as a perfect test bed to compare the classical likelihood ratio test against the universal likelihood ratio test. This work presents the first in-depth exploration of the size, power and relationships between several universal likelihood ratio test variants. We show that a repeated subsampling approach is the best choice in terms of size and power. For large numbers of subsamples, the repeated subsampling set is approximately spherical. We observe reasonable performance even in a high-dimensional setting, where the expected squared radius of the best universal likelihood ratio test’s confidence set is approximately 3/2 times the squared radius of the classical likelihood ratio test’s spherical confidence set. We illustrate the benefits of the universal likelihood ratio test through testing a nonconvex doughnut-shaped null hypothesis, where a universal inference procedure can have higher power than a standard approach.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文