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:摘要直接比较完整分布及位置、尺度、偏度和尾部差异,并应用于雇员年龄分布。

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
Anil K. Bera
Aurobindo Ghosh
Zhijie Xiao

分布相等性的平滑检验

研究问题
如何检验两个概率分布是否相同,同时辨别差异来自位置、尺度、偏度或尾部,并控制样本量不均衡造成的尺寸偏差?
方法与思路
作者用经验分布函数改造 Neyman 平滑检验,提出两种处理相对样本量影响的方法,并分析渐近与有限样本性质。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称检验可辨别均值、方差、偏度和尾部方向的差异;保险应用中报告纽约年龄分布变化主要体现为位置与尺度移动。
阅读关注点
应核对各差异方向的统计量定义、两种尺寸调整方法及卡方极限条件,并检查保险应用的样本构成与比较设计。
阅读边界
仅据所给 Crossref 摘要解读;摘要未给出检验条件和数值结果,年龄分布变化的比较本身不足以识别立法的因果效应。

原文摘要

The two-sample version of the celebrated Pearson goodness-of-fit problem has been a topic of extensive research, and several tests like the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Cramér-von Mises have been suggested. Although these tests perform fairly well as omnibus tests for comparing two probability density functions (PDFs), they may have poor power against specific departures such as in location, scale, skewness, and kurtosis. We propose a new test for the equality of two PDFs based on a modified version of the Neyman smooth test using empirical distribution functions minimizing size distortion in finite samples. The suggested test can detect the specific directions of departure from the null hypothesis. Specifically, it can identify deviations in the directions of mean, variance, skewness, or tail behavior. In a finite sample, the actual probability of type-I error depends on the relative sizes of the two samples. We propose two different approaches to deal with this problem and show that, under appropriate conditions, the proposed tests are asymptotically distributed as chi-squared. We also study the finite sample size and power properties of our proposed test. As an application of our procedure, we compare the age distributions of employees with small employers in New York and Pennsylvania with group insurance before and after the enactment of the “community rating” legislation in New York. It has been conventional wisdom that if community rating is enforced (where the group health insurance premium does not depend on age or any other physical characteristics of the insured), then the insurance market will collapse, since only older or less healthy patients would prefer group insurance. We find that there are significant changes in the age distribution in the population in New York owing mainly to a shift in location and scale.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文