A smooth test for the equality of distributions
Econometric Theory, ISSN: 0266-4666, Vol: 29, Issue: 2, Page: 419-446
2013
- 15Citations
- 235Usage
- 21Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes15
- CrossRef15
- 15
- Usage235
- Downloads185
- Abstract Views50
- Captures21
- Readers21
- 21
- Mentions1
- References1
- Wikipedia1
Article Description
The two-sample version of the celebrated Pearson goodness-of-fit problem has been a topic of extensive research, and several tests like the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Cramér-von Mises have been suggested. Although these tests perform fairly well as omnibus tests for comparing two probability density functions (PDFs), they may have poor power against specific departures such as in location, scale, skewness, and kurtosis. We propose a new test for the equality of two PDFs based on a modified version of the Neyman smooth test using empirical distribution functions minimizing size distortion in finite samples. The suggested test can detect the specific directions of departure from the null hypothesis. Specifically, it can identify deviations in the directions of mean, variance, skewness, or tail behavior. In a finite sample, the actual probability of type-I error depends on the relative sizes of the two samples. We propose two different approaches to deal with this problem and show that, under appropriate conditions, the proposed tests are asymptotically distributed as chi-squared. We also study the finite sample size and power properties of our proposed test. As an application of our procedure, we compare the age distributions of employees with small employers in New York and Pennsylvania with group insurance before and after the enactment of the community rating legislation in New York. It has been conventional wisdom that if community rating is enforced (where the group health insurance premium does not depend on age or any other physical characteristics of the insured), then the insurance market will collapse, since only older or less healthy patients would prefer group insurance. We find that there are significant changes in the age distribution in the population in New York owing mainly to a shift in location and scale. Copyright © 2012 Cambridge University Press.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84875762537&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266466612000370; https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266466612000370/type/journal_article; http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0266466612000370; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0266466612000370; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soe_research/1606; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2605&context=soe_research; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soe_research/1617; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2616&context=soe_research; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/econometric-theory/article/smooth-test-for-the-equality-of-distributions/EB70DCD9F815D6032176096EB0D00C29; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/EB70DCD9F815D6032176096EB0D00C29/S0266466612000370a.pdf/div-class-title-a-smooth-test-for-the-equality-of-distributions-div.pdf; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/econometric-theory/article/abs/smooth-test-for-the-equality-of-distributions/EB70DCD9F815D6032176096EB0D00C29
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know