Testing Hypotheses about Regression Parameters,When the Error Term Is Heteroscedastic

The paper considers methods for testing H₀: β₁ = … = β_p = 0, where β₁, … ,β_p are the slope parameters in a linear regression model with an emphasis on p = 2. It is known that even when the usual error term is normal, but heteroscedastic, control over the probability of a type I error can be poor when using the conventional F test in conjunction with the least squares estimator. When the error term is nonnormal, the situation gets worse. Another practical problem is that power can be poor under even slight departures from normality. Liu and Singh (1997) describe a general bootstrap method for making inferences about parameters in a multivariate setting that is based on the general notion of depth. This paper studies the small-sample properties of their method when applied to the problem at hand. It is found that there is a practical advantage to using Tukey's depth versus the Mahalanobis depth when using a particular robust estimator. When using the ordinary least squares estimator, the method improves upon the conventional F test, but practical problems remain when the sample size is less than 60. In simulations, using Tukey's depth with the robust estimator gave the best results, in terms of type I errors, among the five methods studied.     

Some Adaptive Robust Estimators which Work with Real Data

An adaptive R-estimator θ_A and an adaptive trimmed mean MAT are proposed. The performance of these and a number of other robust estimators are studied on real data sets, drawn from the astronomical, behavioural, biomedical, chemical, engineering and physical sciences. In the case of sets that can be assumed to have come from symmetric distributions, the best performer is θ_A. The next best performers are the Hodges-Lehmann estimator, Bisquare (7.5) and Huber (1.5), in that order. MAT works well with all kinds of sets–symmetric or skewed. Extensions of these results to ANOVA and regression models are mentioned.     

Confidence Intervals of the Attributable Risk under Cross‐Sectional Sampling with Confounders

Since it can account for both the strength of the association between exposure to a risk factor and the underlying disease of interest and the prevalence of the risk factor, the attributable risk (AR) is probably the most commonly used epidemiologic measure for public health administrators to locate important risk factors. This paper discusses interval estimation of the AR in the presence of confounders under cross‐sectional sampling. This paper considers four asymptotic interval estimators which are direct generalizations of those originally proposed for the case of no confounders, and employs Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the finite‐sample performance of these estimators in a variety of situations. This paper finds that interval estimators using Wald's test statistic and a quadratic equation suggested here can consistently perform reasonably well with respect to the coverage probability in all the situations considered here. This paper notes that the interval estimator using the logarithmic transformation, that is previously found to consistently perform well for the case of no confounders, may have the coverage probability less than the desired confidence level when the underlying common prevalence rate ratio (RR) across strata between the exposure and the non‐exposure is large (≥4). This paper further notes that the interval estimator using the logit transformation is inappropriate for use when the underlying common RR ≐ 1. On the other hand, when the underlying common RR is large (≥4), this interval estimator is probably preferable to all the other three estimators. When the sample size is large (≥400) and the RR ≥ 2 in the situations considered here, this paper finds that all the four interval estimators developed here are essentially equivalent with respect to both the coverage probability and the average length.     

Sampling distributions, biases, variances, and confidence intervals for genetic correlations

Genetic correlations are frequently estimated from natural and experimental populations, yet many of the statistical properties of estimators of are not known, and accurate methods have not been described for estimating the precision of estimates of Our objective was to assess the statistical properties of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), restricted maximum likelihood (REML), and maximum likelihood (ML) estimators of by simulating bivariate normal samples for the one-way balanced linear model. We estimated probabilities of non-positive definite MANOVA estimates of genetic variance-covariance matrices and biases and variances of MANOVA, REML, and ML estimators of and assessed the accuracy of parametric, jackknife, and bootstrap variance and confidence interval estimators for MANOVA estimates of were normally distributed. REML and ML estimates were normally distributed for but skewed for and 0.9. All of the estimators were biased. The MANOVA estimator was less biased than REML and ML estimators when heritability (H), the number of genotypes (n), and the number of replications (r) were low. The biases were otherwise nearly equal for different estimators and could not be reduced by jackknifing or bootstrapping. The variance of the MANOVA estimator was greater than the variance of the REML or ML estimator for most H, n, and r. Bootstrapping produced estimates of the variance of close to the known variance, especially for REML and ML. The observed coverages of the REML and ML bootstrap interval estimators were consistently close to stated coverages, whereas the observed coverage of the MANOVA bootstrap interval estimator was unsatisfactory for some H, n, and r. The other interval estimators produced unsatisfactory coverages. REML and ML bootstrap interval estimates were narrower than MANOVA bootstrap interval estimates for most H, and r. Received: 6 July 1995 / Accepted: 8 March 1996     

A Class of Almost Unbiased Estimators for Finite Populations Mean Using Two Auxiliary Variables

For estimating finite population mean -Y₀ of study character y₀, a class of almost unbiased estimators applying jackknife technique envisaged by Quenouille (1956) is derived. Optimum unbiased estimator (OUE) is also investigated with its variance formula. An empirical study is carried out to demonstrate the performance of the constructed estimator over the usual unbiased estimator, Srivastava (1965), Singh (1967), Singh and Biradar (1992), Tracy , Singh , and Singh (1996) and other almost unbiased estimators.     

Multiple Comparisons Among Dependent Groups Based on a Modified One‐Step M‐Estimator

Currently, among multiple comparison procedures for dependent groups, a bootstrap‐t with a 20% trimmed mean performs relatively well in terms of both Type I error probabilities and power. However, trimmed means suffer from two general concerns described in the paper. Robust M‐estimators address these concerns, but now no method has been found that gives good control over the probability of a Type I error when sample sizes are small. The paper suggests using instead a modified one‐step M‐estimator that retains the advantages of both trimmed means and robust M‐estimators. Yet another concern is that the more successful methods for trimmed means can be too conservative in terms of Type I errors. Two methods for performing all pairwise multiple comparisons are considered. In simulations, both methods avoid a familywise error (FWE) rate larger than the nominal level. The method based on comparing measures of location associated with the marginal distributions can have an actual FWE that is well below the nominal level when variables are highly correlated. However, the method based on difference scores performs reasonably well with very small sample sizes, and it generally performs better than any of the methods studied in Wilcox (1997b).     

Estimators Asymptotically Minimax in Wide Sense

Estimators of location are considered. Huber (1964) introduced estimators asymptotically minimax on the set ?? of all regular M-estimators, for a given contamination ε and for the set Q of all regular symmetric alternative data sources. We extend his concept by admitting arbitrary sets ?? of regular M-estimators and arbitrary sets Q or regular symmetric alternative sources, and also by replacing the singletons [ε] ? (0, 1) by arbitrary subsets ?? ? (0, 1). The resulting estimator cannot in general be evaluated explicitly. But for finite T it exists and, if ?? and Q are finite too, it may be chosen by a computer. This extra burden is justified in some cases since more than 100% relative efficiency gain against all Huber's Hk is achievable in this manner. Such gains are achieved for a nontrivial family Q by the estimator proposed in Vajda (1984), with redescending influence curve, which is shown to be asymptotically minimax in wide sense.     

Use and misuse of the reduced major axis for line‐fitting

Many investigators use the reduced major axis (RMA) instead of ordinary least squares (OLS) to define a line of best fit for a bivariate relationship when the variable represented on the X‐axis is measured with error. OLS frequently is described as requiring the assumption that X is measured without error while RMA incorporates an assumption that there is error in X. Although an RMA fit actually involves a very specific pattern of error variance, investigators have prioritized the presence versus the absence of error rather than the pattern of error in selecting between the two methods. Another difference between RMA and OLS is that RMA is symmetric, meaning that a single line defines the bivariate relationship, regardless of which variable is X and which is Y, while OLS is asymmetric, so that the slope and resulting interpretation of the data are changed when the variables assigned to X and Y are reversed. The concept of error is reviewed and expanded from previous discussions, and it is argued that the symmetry‐asymmetry issue should be the criterion by which investigators choose between RMA and OLS. This is a biological question about the relationship between variables. It is determined by the investigator, not dictated by the pattern of error in the data. If X is measured with error but OLS should be used because the biological question is asymmetric, there are several methods available for adjusting the OLS slope to reflect the bias due to error. RMA is being used in many analyses for which OLS would be more appropriate. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Improving sandwich variance estimation for marginal Cox analysis of cluster randomized trials

Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) frequently recruit a small number of clusters, therefore necessitating the application of small-sample corrections for valid inference. A recent systematic review indicated that CRTs reporting right-censored, time-to-event outcomes are not uncommon and that the marginal Cox proportional hazards model is one of the common approaches used for primary analysis. While small-sample corrections have been studied under marginal models with continuous, binary, and count outcomes, no prior research has been devoted to the development and evaluation of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators when clustered time-to-event outcomes are analyzed by the marginal Cox model. To improve current practice, we propose nine bias-corrected sandwich variance estimators for the analysis of CRTs using the marginal Cox model and report on a simulation study to evaluate their small-sample properties. Our results indicate that the optimal choice of bias-corrected sandwich variance estimator for CRTs with survival outcomes can depend on the variability of cluster sizes and can also slightly differ whether it is evaluated according to relative bias or type I error rate. Finally, we illustrate the new variance estimators in a real-world CRT where the conclusion about intervention effectiveness differs depending on the use of small-sample bias corrections. The proposed sandwich variance estimators are implemented in an R package CoxBcv .     

Empirical Bayesian estimation of the disease transmission probability in multiple-vector-transfer designs

Plant disease is responsible for major losses in agriculture throughout the world. Diseases are often spread by insect organisms that transmit a bacterium, virus, or other pathogen. To assess disease epidemics, plant pathologists often use multiple-vector-transfers. In such contexts, groups of insect vectors are moved from an infected source to each of n test plants that will then be observed for developing symptoms of infection. The purpose of this paper is to present new estimators for p, the probability of pathogen transmission for an individual vector, motivated from an empirical Bayesian approach. We specifically investigate four such estimators, characterize their small-sample properties, and propose new credible intervals for p. These estimators remove the need to specify hyperparameters a priori and are shown to be easier to compute than the classical Bayes estimators proposed by Chaubey and Li (1995, Journal of Official Statistics 11, 1035-1046) and Chick (1996, Biometrics 52, 1055-1062). Furthermore, some of these estimators are shown to have better frequentist properties than the commonly used maximum likelihood estimator and to provide a smaller Bayes risk than the estimator proposed by Burrows (1987, Phytopathology 77, 363-365).     

A Monte Carlo Study of Robustness of Pretest and Shrinkage Estimators in Pooling Coefficients of Variation

Pooling data, when justified, is advantageous for estimating the true parameter. In this paper the problem of estimating the coefficient of variation is considered when it is a priori suspected that two coefficients of variation are the same. Various estimators based on pretest and shrinkage rules are considered. A comparison through the Simulated Mean Squared Error (SMSE) criterion is carried out among various proposed estimators of the target coefficient of variation. The relative simulated efficiencies of the restricted, shrinkage restricted and shrinkage pretest estimators are studied. It is found that the proposed estimators are quite robust when the sample sizes are not too large. The result of Monte Carlo study indicates that the proposed shrinkage pretest estimator is efficient than the usual estimator in a wider range.     

A genetic evaluation of relatedness for broodstock management of captive,endangered Snake River sockeye salmon, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Oncorhynchus nerka</Emphasis>

The use of captive broodstocks is becoming more frequently employed as the number of species facing endangerment or extinction throughout the world increases. Efforts to rebuild the endangered Snake River sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka, population have been ongoing for over a decade, but the use of microsatellite data to develop inbreeding avoidance matrices is a more recent component to the program. This study used known genealogical relationships among sockeye salmon offspring to test four different pairwise relatedness estimators and a maximum-likelihood (M-L) relatedness estimator. The goal of this study was to develop a breeding strategy with these estimators that would minimize the loss of genetic diversity, minimize inbreeding, and determine how returning anadromous adults are incorporated into the broodstock along with full-term hatchery adults. Results of this study indicated that both the M _xy and R _QG estimators had the lowest Type II error rates and the M-L and R _R estimators had the lowest Type I error rates. An approach that utilizes a combination of estimators may provide the most valuable information for managers. We recommend that the M-L and R _R methods be used to rank the genetic importance of returning adults and the M _xy or R _QG estimators be used to determine which fish to pair for spawning. This approach provides for the best genetic management of this captive, endangered population and should be generally applicable to the genetic management of other endangered stocks with no pedigree.     

Effects of internal diffusion on the lineweaver-Burk plots for immobilized enzymes

The effect of internal diffusion on the slope and the intercept of the LineweaverBurk plots for the immobilized enzyme was considered theoretically and it was found that the slope and the intercept are influenced not only by the dimensionless term M but also by the range of the dimensionless bulk substrate concentration ζ_b. The dependencies of the slope and the intercept on M and on the rate of ζ_b are shown graphically. Accurate estimations of M and the maximum velocity of the immobilized enzyme give the true, not apparent, Michaelis constant. It is shown that the linear correlations in the Lineweaver-Burk plots do not always coincide with the correlations for the estimation of M and the maximum velocity. It also is shown that large values of M may induce a serious error in the estimation of M with large values of ζ_b and in an estimation of the maximum velocity with small values of ζ_b.     

A Revisit on Comparing the Asymptotic Interval Estimators of Odds Ratio in a Single 2 × 2 Table

It is well known that Cornfield 's confidence interval of the odds ratio with the continuity correction can mimic the performance of the exact method. Furthermore, because the calculation procedure of using the former is much simpler than that of using the latter, Cornfield 's confidence interval with the continuity correction is highly recommended by many publications. However, all these papers that draw this conclusion are on the basis of examining the coverage probability exclusively. The efficiency of the resulting confidence intervals is completely ignored. This paper calculates and compares the coverage probability and the average length for Woolf s logit interval estimator, Gart 's logit interval estimator of adding 0.50, Cornfield 's interval estimator with the continuity correction, and Cornfield 's interval estimator without the continuity correction in a variety of situations. This paper notes that Cornfield 's interval estimator with the continuity correction is too conservative, while Cornfield 's method without the continuity correction can improve efficiency without sacrificing the accuracy of the coverage probability. This paper further notes that when the sample size is small (say, 20 or 30 per group) and the probability of exposure in the control group is small (say, 0.10) or large (say, 0.90), using Cornfield 's method without the continuity correction is likely preferable to all the other estimators considered here. When the sample size is large (say, 100 per group) or when the probability of exposure in the control group is moderate (say, 0.50), Gart 's logit interval estimator is probably the best.     

A comparison of single‐sample estimators of effective population sizes from genetic marker data

In molecular ecology and conservation genetics studies, the important parameter of effective population size (N_e) is increasingly estimated from a single sample of individuals taken at random from a population and genotyped at a number of marker loci. Several estimators are developed, based on the information of linkage disequilibrium (LD), heterozygote excess (HE), molecular coancestry (MC) and sibship frequency (SF) in marker data. The most popular is the LD estimator, because it is more accurate than HE and MC estimators and is simpler to calculate than SF estimator. However, little is known about the accuracy of LD estimator relative to that of SF and about the robustness of all single‐sample estimators when some simplifying assumptions (e.g. random mating, no linkage, no genotyping errors) are violated. This study fills the gaps and uses extensive simulations to compare the biases and accuracies of the four estimators for different population properties (e.g. bottlenecks, nonrandom mating, haplodiploid), marker properties (e.g. linkage, polymorphisms) and sample properties (e.g. numbers of individuals and markers) and to compare the robustness of the four estimators when marker data are imperfect (with allelic dropouts). Extensive simulations show that SF estimator is more accurate, has a much wider application scope (e.g. suitable to nonrandom mating such as selfing, haplodiploid species, dominant markers) and is more robust (e.g. to the presence of linkage and genotyping errors of markers) than the other estimators. An empirical data set from a Yellowstone grizzly bear population was analysed to demonstrate the use of the SF estimator in practice.     

On the inadmissibility of Watterson's estimator

We consider the estimation of the scaled mutation parameter θ, which is one of the parameters of key interest in population genetics. We provide a general result showing when estimators of θ can be improved using shrinkage when taking the mean squared error as the measure of performance. As a consequence, we show that Watterson’s estimator is inadmissible, and propose an alternative shrinkage-based estimator that is easy to calculate and has a smaller mean squared error than Watterson’s estimator for all possible parameter values 0<θ<∞. This estimator is admissible in the class of all linear estimators. We then derive improved versions for other estimators of θ, including the MLE. We also investigate how an improvement can be obtained both when combining information from several independent loci and when explicitly taking into account recombination. A simulation study provides information about the amount of improvement achieved by our alternative estimators.     

Confidence intervals of evolutionary distances between sequences and comparison with usual approaches including the bootstrap method

Two methods are commonly employed for evaluating the extent of the uncertainty of evolutionary distances between sequences: either some estimator of the variance of the distance estimator, or the bootstrap method. However, both approaches can be misleading, particularly when the evolutionary distance is small. We propose using another statistical method which does not have the same defect: interval estimation. We show how confidence intervals may be constructed for the Jukes and Cantor (1969) and Kimura two-parameter (1980) estimators. We compare the exact confidence intervals thus obtained with the approximate intervals derived by the two previous methods, using artificial and biological data. The results show that the usual methods clearly underestimate the variability when the substitution rate is low and when sequences are short. Moreover, our analysis suggests that similar results may be expected for other evolutionary distance estimators.      

A Class of Ratio-Cum-Product-Type Estimator

The problem of estimating the population mean using an auxiliary information has been dealt with in literature quite extensively. Ratio, product, linear regression and ratio-type estimators are well known. A class of ratio-cum-product-type estimator is proposed in this paper. Its bias and variance to the first order of approximation are obtained. For an appropriate weight ‘a’ and good range of α-values, it is found that the proposed estimator is superior than a set of estimators (i.e., sample mean, usual ratio and product estimators, SRIVASTAVA's (1967) estimator, CHAKRABARTY's (1979) estimator and a product-type estimator) which are, in fact, the particular cases of it. At optimum value of α, the proposed estimator is as efficient as linear regression estimator.     

Estimating the abundance of rare and elusive carnivores from photographic-sampling data when the population size is very small

Conservation and management agencies require accurate and precise estimates of abundance when considering the status of a species and the need for directed actions. Due to the proliferation of remote sampling cameras, there has been an increase in capture–recapture studies that estimate the abundance of rare and/or elusive species using closed capture–recapture estimators (C–R). However, data from these studies often do not meet necessary statistical assumptions. Common attributes of these data are (1) infrequent detections, (2) a small number of individuals detected, (3) long survey durations, and (4) variability in detection among individuals. We believe there is a need for guidance when analyzing this type of sparse data. We highlight statistical limitations of closed C–R estimators when data are sparse and suggest an alternative approach over the conventional use of the Jackknife estimator. Our approach aims to maximize the probability individuals are detected at least once over the entire sampling period, thus making the modeling of variability in the detection process irrelevant, estimating abundance accurately and precisely. We use simulations to demonstrate when using the unconditional-likelihood M ₀ (constant detection probability) closed C–R estimator with profile-likelihood confidence intervals provides reliable results even when detection varies by individual. If each individual in the population is detected on average of at least 2.5 times, abundance estimates are accurate and precise. When studies sample the same species at multiple areas or at the same area over time, we suggest sharing detection information across datasets to increase precision when estimating abundance. The approach suggested here should be useful for monitoring small populations of species that are difficult to detect.     

Homoplasy corrected estimation of genetic similarity from AFLP bands,and the effect of the number of bands on the precision of estimation

AFLP is a DNA fingerprinting technique, resulting in binary band presence–absence patterns, called profiles, with known or unknown band positions. We model AFLP as a sampling procedure of fragments, with lengths sampled from a distribution. Bands represent fragments of specific lengths. We focus on estimation of pairwise genetic similarity, defined as average fraction of common fragments, by AFLP. Usual estimators are Dice (D) or Jaccard coefficients. D overestimates genetic similarity, since identical bands in profile pairs may correspond to different fragments (homoplasy). Another complicating factor is the occurrence of different fragments of equal length within a profile, appearing as a single band, which we call collision. The bias of D increases with larger numbers of bands, and lower genetic similarity. We propose two homoplasy- and collision-corrected estimators of genetic similarity. The first is a modification of D, replacing band counts by estimated fragment counts. The second is a maximum likelihood estimator, only applicable if band positions are available. Properties of the estimators are studied by simulation. Standard errors and confidence intervals for the first are obtained by bootstrapping, and for the second by likelihood theory. The estimators are nearly unbiased, and have for most practical cases smaller standard error than D. The likelihood-based estimator generally gives the highest precision. The relationship between fragment counts and precision is studied using simulation. The usual range of band counts (50–100) appears nearly optimal. The methodology is illustrated using data from a phylogenetic study on lettuce.