Demidenko Eugene
Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA.
Model Assist Stat Appl. 2020;15(4):335-349. doi: 10.3233/mas-200505. Epub 2020 Dec 25.
Traditionally, asymptotic tests are studied and applied under local alternative (Aivazian, et al., 1985). There exists a widespread opinion that the Wald, likelihood ratio, and score tests are asymptotically equivalent. We dispel this myth by showing that These tests have different statistical power in the presence of nuisance parameters. The local properties of the tests are described in terms of the first and second derivative evaluated at the null hypothesis. The comparison of the tests are illustrated with two popular regression models: linear regression with random predictor and logistic regression with binary covariate. We study the aberrant behavior of the tests when the distance between the null and alternative does not vanish with the sample size. We demonstrate that these tests have different asymptotic power. In particular, the score test is generally asymptotically biased but slightly superior for linear regression in a close neighborhood of the null. The power approximations are confirmed through simulations.
传统上,渐近检验是在局部备择假设下进行研究和应用的(艾瓦齐安等人,1985年)。有一种普遍的观点认为, Wald检验、似然比检验和得分检验在渐近意义上是等价的。我们通过表明在存在干扰参数的情况下这些检验具有不同的统计功效来消除这一误解。检验的局部性质是根据在原假设处评估的一阶和二阶导数来描述的。通过两个流行的回归模型来说明检验的比较:具有随机预测变量的线性回归和具有二元协变量的逻辑回归。我们研究了当原假设和备择假设之间的距离不随样本量消失时检验的异常行为。我们证明这些检验具有不同的渐近功效。特别是,得分检验通常在渐近意义上有偏差,但在原假设的紧邻域内对于线性回归略胜一筹。通过模拟证实了功效近似。