arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2403.20182stat.ME
收藏

量化不确定性:我们只需要自助法吗?

Quantifying Uncertainty: All We Need is the Bootstrap?

Urša Zrimšek, Erik Štrumbelj

AI总结:

本文通过文献综述和模拟研究,证明非参数自助法可替代传统估计方法,且双重自助法优于BCa,能简化统计实践。

摘要:

通过一项批判性文献综述和全面的模拟研究,我们表明:(a) 非参数自助法在基本估计任务(均值、方差、四分位数、相关性)中,是通常教授和使用的常用方法的可行替代方案;(b) 与大多数相关工作中的建议相反,双重自助法优于BCa方法。通过标准误差、置信区间、假设检验及相关度量来量化不确定性,是统计实践的基本方面。然而,这些技术涉及多种方法、数学公式和基础概念,可能较为复杂。非参数自助法以其简单性和普遍适用性著称,能否作为一种通用的替代方案?本文通过回顾现有文献,并针对不同样本量、置信水平、数据生成过程和统计泛函,对单侧和双侧置信区间进行模拟分析,来回答这一问题。结果表明,双重自助法始终表现最佳,是常见统计任务中传统方法的有前景的替代方案。这些结果表明,自助法,特别是双重自助法,可以在不牺牲有效性的情况下简化统计教育和实践。

英文摘要:

A critical literature review and comprehensive simulation study is used to show that (a) non-parametric bootstrap is a viable alternative to commonly taught and used methods in basic estimation tasks (mean, variance, quartiles, correlation) and (b), contrary to recommendations in most related work, double bootstrap performs better than BCa. Quantifying uncertainty through standard errors, confidence intervals, hypothesis tests, and related measures is a fundamental aspect of statistical practice. However, these techniques involve a variety of methods, mathematical formulas, and underlying concepts, which can be complex. Could the non-parametric bootstrap, known for its simplicity and general applicability, serve as a universal alternative? This paper addresses this question through a review of the existing literature and a simulation analysis of one- and two-sided confidence intervals across varying sample sizes, confidence levels, data-generating processes, and statistical functionals. Results show that the double bootstrap consistently performs best and is a promising alternative to traditional methods used for common statistical tasks. These results suggest that the bootstrap, particularly the double bootstrap, could simplify statistical education and practice without compromising effectiveness.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑