Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![GOODNESS-OF-FIT TESTS FOR GEE MODEL]( "GOODNESS-OF-FIT TESTS FOR GEE MODEL")
GOODNESS-OF-FIT TESTS FOR GEE MODEL35,99 €![Robust Latent Feature Learning for Incomplete Big Data]( "Robust Latent Feature Learning for Incomplete Big Data")
Robust Latent Feature Learning for Incomplete Big Data41,99 €![Permutation Tests in Shape Analysis]( "Permutation Tests in Shape Analysis")
Permutation Tests in Shape Analysis41,99 €![The Specific Linearity Tests in Time Series]( "The Specific Linearity Tests in Time Series")
The Specific Linearity Tests in Time Series40,99 €![Analytical Methods in Statistics]( "Analytical Methods in Statistics")
Analytical Methods in Statistics81,99 €![Analytical Methods in Statistics]( "Analytical Methods in Statistics")
Analytical Methods in Statistics81,99 €![Robustness in Statistical Forecasting]( "Robustness in Statistical Forecasting")
Robustness in Statistical Forecasting41,99 €
Data analysis is conducted via parametric or
nonparametric methods, depending on the data.
Authors state that parametric techniques
are more robust with regard to Type I error and more
powerful than nonparametric techniques.
Nonparametric methods are good alternatives to
parametric methods being robust and powerful under
non-normality.
Permutation tests offer advantages compared to
parametric tests as they require fewer
assumptions. It was found that they are robust with
regard to Type I error and powerful. However,
permutation tests maintain the Type I error to the
nominal with no evidence that they are more
powerful than nonparametric tests.
Monte Carlo simulations were used to investigate the
Type I error and power of the t-, permutation t- and
the Wilcoxon tests for some distributions.It
was found that, under normality, the t and
permutation t-tests were robust with regard to Type
I error compared to the Wilcoxon test. They were
also slightly more powerful than the Wilcoxon test.
However under non-normality, the Wilcoxon test was
robust with regard to Type I error and much more
powerful than the t and permutation t-tests.
nonparametric methods, depending on the data.
Authors state that parametric techniques
are more robust with regard to Type I error and more
powerful than nonparametric techniques.
Nonparametric methods are good alternatives to
parametric methods being robust and powerful under
non-normality.
Permutation tests offer advantages compared to
parametric tests as they require fewer
assumptions. It was found that they are robust with
regard to Type I error and powerful. However,
permutation tests maintain the Type I error to the
nominal with no evidence that they are more
powerful than nonparametric tests.
Monte Carlo simulations were used to investigate the
Type I error and power of the t-, permutation t- and
the Wilcoxon tests for some distributions.It
was found that, under normality, the t and
permutation t-tests were robust with regard to Type
I error compared to the Wilcoxon test. They were
also slightly more powerful than the Wilcoxon test.
However under non-normality, the Wilcoxon test was
robust with regard to Type I error and much more
powerful than the t and permutation t-tests.