A conformal test of linear models via permutation-augmented regressions
通过置换增广回归构造线性模型的保形检验AI 解读 ↓
← 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：摘要讨论一般线性模型检验和生物医学应用，未明确因果识别、面板或其他所列研究对象，因此暂不分类。
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
通过置换增广回归构造线性模型的保形检验
- 研究问题
- 在线性模型的偏相关检验中，如何利用置换构造具有有限样本第一类错误保证的方法，同时尽量保留检验功效？
- 方法与思路
- 作者提出基于置换增广回归的保形检验 PALMRT，并通过模拟及长新冠研究，与传统方法和其他置换检验比较。
- 材料陈述的贡献
- 摘要称，PALMRT 对任意固定设计和误差分布提供不超过目标水平两倍的第一类错误界，并报告有竞争力的功效。
- 阅读关注点
- 应核对误差联合分布及置换构造的完整条件，特别区分两倍目标水平的保证与目标水平保证，并检查多重校正方式。
- 阅读边界
- 仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要，稿件版本未注明；所述错误界为 2α 而非 α，摘要未展开全部条件，比较优势也不能推广到所有设计与备择。
原文摘要
Permutation tests are widely recognized as robust alternatives to tests based on normal theory. Random permutation tests have been frequently employed to assess the significance of variables in linear models. Despite their widespread use, existing random permutation tests lack finite-sample and assumption-free guarantees for controlling type I error in partial correlation tests. To address this ongoing challenge, we have developed a conformal test through permutation-augmented regressions, which we refer to as PALMRT. PALMRT not only achieves power competitive with conventional methods but also provides reliable control of type I errors at no more than 2α, given any targeted level α, for arbitrary fixed designs and error distributions. We have confirmed this through extensive simulations. Compared to the cyclic permutation test (CPT) and residual permutation test (RPT), which also offer theoretical guarantees, PALMRT does not compromise as much on power or set stringent requirements on the sample size, making it suitable for diverse biomedical applications. We further illustrate the differences in a long-Covid study where PALMRT validated key findings previously identified using the t-test after multiple corrections, while both CPT and RPT suffered from a drastic loss of power and failed to identify any discoveries. We endorse PALMRT as a robust and practical hypothesis test in scientific research for its superior error control, power preservation, and simplicity.