Cramér–von Mises criterion

In statistics the Cramér–von Mises criterion is a criterion used for judging the goodness of fit of a cumulative distribution function compared to a given empirical distribution function , or for comparing two empirical distributions. It is also used as a part of other algorithms, such as minimum distance estimation. It is defined as

In one-sample applications is the theoretical distribution and is the empirically observed distribution. Alternatively the two distributions can both be empirically estimated ones; this is called the two-sample case.

The criterion is named after Harald Cramér and Richard Edler von Mises who first proposed it in 1928–1930.[1][2] The generalization to two samples is due to Anderson.[3]

The Cramér–von Mises test is an alternative to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (1933)[4].

Cramér–von Mises test (one sample)

Let be the observed values, in increasing order. Then the statistic is[3]:1153[5]

If this value is larger than the tabulated value, then the hypothesis that the data came from the distribution can be rejected.

Watson test

A modified version of the Cramér–von Mises test is the Watson test[6] which uses the statistic U2, where[5]

where

Cramér–von Mises test (two samples)

Let and be the observed values in the first and second sample respectively, in increasing order. Let be the ranks of the x's in the combined sample, and let be the ranks of the y's in the combined sample. Anderson[3]:1149 shows that

where U is defined as

If the value of T is larger than the tabulated values,[3]:1154–1159 the hypothesis that the two samples come from the same distribution can be rejected. (Some books give critical values for U, which is more convenient, as it avoids the need to compute T via the expression above. The conclusion will be the same).

The above assumes there are no duplicates in the , , and sequences. So is unique, and its rank is in the sorted list . If there are duplicates, and through are a run of identical values in the sorted list, then one common approach is the midrank[7] method: assign each duplicate a "rank" of . In the above equations, in the expressions and , duplicates can modify all four variables , , , and .

gollark: Oh, and as an extension to the third thing, if you already have some sort of vast surveillance apparatus, even if you trust the government of *now*, a worse government could come along and use it later for... totalitarian things.
gollark: For example:- the average person probably does *some* sort of illegal/shameful/bad/whatever stuff, and if some organization has information on that it can use it against people it wants to discredit (basically, information leads to power, so information asymmetry leads to power asymmetry). This can happen if you decide to be an activist or something much later, even- having lots of data on you means you can be manipulated more easily (see, partly, targeted advertising, except that actually seems to mostly be poorly targeted)- having a government be more effective at detecting minor crimes (which reduced privacy could allow for) might *not* actually be a good thing, as some crimes (drug use, I guess?) are kind of stupid and at least somewhat tolerable because they *can't* be entirely enforced practically
gollark: No, it probably isn't your fault, it must have been dropped from my brain stack while I was writing the rest.
gollark: ... I forgot one of them, hold on while I try and reremember it.
gollark: That's probably one of them. I'm writing.

References

  1. Cramér, H. (1928). "On the Composition of Elementary Errors". Scandinavian Actuarial Journal. 1928 (1): 13–74. doi:10.1080/03461238.1928.10416862.
  2. von Mises, R. E. (1928). Wahrscheinlichkeit, Statistik und Wahrheit. Julius Springer.
  3. Anderson, T. W. (1962). "On the Distribution of the Two-Sample Cramer–von Mises Criterion" (PDF). Annals of Mathematical Statistics. Institute of Mathematical Statistics. 33 (3): 1148–1159. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177704477. ISSN 0003-4851. Retrieved June 12, 2009.
  4. A.N. Kolmogorov, "Sulla determinizione empirica di una legge di distribuzione" Giorn. Ist. Ital. Attuari , 4 (1933) pp. 83–91
  5. Pearson, E.S., Hartley, H.O. (1972) Biometrika Tables for Statisticians, Volume 2, CUP. ISBN 0-521-06937-8 (page 118 and Table 54)
  6. Watson, G.S. (1961) "Goodness-Of-Fit Tests on a Circle", Biometrika, 48 (1/2), 109-114 JSTOR 2333135
  7. Ruymgaart, F. H., (1980) "A unified approach to the asymptotic distribution theory of certain midrank statistics". In: Statistique non Parametrique Asymptotique, 1±18, J. P. Raoult (Ed.), Lecture Notes on Mathematics, No. 821, Springer, Berlin.
  • M. A. Stephens (1986). "Tests Based on EDF Statistics". In D'Agostino, R.B.; Stephens, M.A. (eds.). Goodness-of-Fit Techniques. New York: Marcel Dekker. ISBN 0-8247-7487-6.

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.