Nonparametric comparison of regression curves: an empirical process approach
回归曲线的非参数比较:经验过程方法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:摘要研究一般回归曲线相等性的非参数检验,未明确涉及因果效应、结构变化或所列其他方向。
回归曲线的非参数比较:经验过程方法AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We propose a new test for the comparison of two regression curves that is based on a difference of two marked empirical processes based on residuals. The large sample behavior of the corresponding statistic is studied to provide a full nonparametric comparison of regression curves. In contrast to most procedures suggested in the literature, the new procedure is applicable in the case of different design points and heteroscedasticity. Moreover, it is demonstrated that the proposed test detects continuous alternatives converging to the null at a rate $N^{-1/2}$ and that, in contrast to all other available procedures based on marked empirical processes, the new test allows the optimal choice of bandwidths for curve estimation (e.g., $N^{-1/5}$ in the case of twice differentiable regression functions). As a by-product we explain the problems of a related test proposed by Kulasekera [J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 90 (1995) 1085-1093] and Kulasekera and Wang [J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 92 (1997) 500-511] with respect to accuracy in the approximation of the level. These difficulties mainly originate from the comparison with the quantiles of an inappropriate limit distribution. A simulation study is conducted to investigate the finite sample properties of a wild bootstrap version of the new test and to compare it with the so far available procedures. Finally, heteroscedastic data is analyzed in order to demonstrate the benefits of the new test compared to the so far available procedures which require homoscedasticity.