48,487 research outputs found

    On stepdown control of the false discovery proportion

    Full text link
    Consider the problem of testing multiple null hypotheses. A classical approach to dealing with the multiplicity problem is to restrict attention to procedures that control the familywise error rate (FWERFWER), the probability of even one false rejection. However, if ss is large, control of the FWERFWER is so stringent that the ability of a procedure which controls the FWERFWER to detect false null hypotheses is limited. Consequently, it is desirable to consider other measures of error control. We will consider methods based on control of the false discovery proportion (FDPFDP) defined by the number of false rejections divided by the total number of rejections (defined to be 0 if there are no rejections). The false discovery rate proposed by Benjamini and Hochberg (1995) controls E(FDP)E(FDP). Here, we construct methods such that, for any γ\gamma and α\alpha, P{FDP>γ}αP\{FDP>\gamma \}\le \alpha. Based on pp-values of individual tests, we consider stepdown procedures that control the FDPFDP, without imposing dependence assumptions on the joint distribution of the pp-values. A greatly improved version of a method given in Lehmann and Romano \citer10 is derived and generalized to provide a means by which any sequence of nondecreasing constants can be rescaled to ensure control of the FDPFDP. We also provide a stepdown procedure that controls the FDRFDR under a dependence assumption.Comment: Published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/074921706000000383 in the IMS Lecture Notes--Monograph Series (http://www.imstat.org/publications/lecnotes.htm) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

    Estimating False Discovery Proportion Under Arbitrary Covariance Dependence

    Full text link
    Multiple hypothesis testing is a fundamental problem in high dimensional inference, with wide applications in many scientific fields. In genome-wide association studies, tens of thousands of tests are performed simultaneously to find if any SNPs are associated with some traits and those tests are correlated. When test statistics are correlated, false discovery control becomes very challenging under arbitrary dependence. In the current paper, we propose a novel method based on principal factor approximation, which successfully subtracts the common dependence and weakens significantly the correlation structure, to deal with an arbitrary dependence structure. We derive an approximate expression for false discovery proportion (FDP) in large scale multiple testing when a common threshold is used and provide a consistent estimate of realized FDP. This result has important applications in controlling FDR and FDP. Our estimate of realized FDP compares favorably with Efron (2007)'s approach, as demonstrated in the simulated examples. Our approach is further illustrated by some real data applications. We also propose a dependence-adjusted procedure, which is more powerful than the fixed threshold procedure.Comment: 51 pages, 7 figures. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1012.439

    Stepup procedures for control of generalizations of the familywise error rate

    Full text link
    Consider the multiple testing problem of testing null hypotheses H1,...,HsH_1,...,H_s. A classical approach to dealing with the multiplicity problem is to restrict attention to procedures that control the familywise error rate (FWER\mathit{FWER}), the probability of even one false rejection. But if ss is large, control of the FWER\mathit{FWER} is so stringent that the ability of a procedure that controls the FWER\mathit{FWER} to detect false null hypotheses is limited. It is therefore desirable to consider other measures of error control. This article considers two generalizations of the FWER\mathit{FWER}. The first is the kFWERk-\mathit{FWER}, in which one is willing to tolerate kk or more false rejections for some fixed k1k\geq 1. The second is based on the false discovery proportion (FDP\mathit{FDP}), defined to be the number of false rejections divided by the total number of rejections (and defined to be 0 if there are no rejections). Benjamini and Hochberg [J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 57 (1995) 289--300] proposed control of the false discovery rate (FDR\mathit{FDR}), by which they meant that, for fixed α\alpha, E(FDP)αE(\mathit{FDP})\leq\alpha. Here, we consider control of the FDP\mathit{FDP} in the sense that, for fixed γ\gamma and α\alpha, P{FDP>γ}αP\{\mathit{FDP}>\gamma\}\leq \alpha. Beginning with any nondecreasing sequence of constants and pp-values for the individual tests, we derive stepup procedures that control each of these two measures of error control without imposing any assumptions on the dependence structure of the pp-values. We use our results to point out a few interesting connections with some closely related stepdown procedures. We then compare and contrast two FDP\mathit{FDP}-controlling procedures obtained using our results with the stepup procedure for control of the FDR\mathit{FDR} of Benjamini and Yekutieli [Ann. Statist. 29 (2001) 1165--1188].Comment: Published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/009053606000000461 in the Annals of Statistics (http://www.imstat.org/aos/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

    A stochastic process approach to false discovery control

    Full text link
    This paper extends the theory of false discovery rates (FDR) pioneered by Benjamini and Hochberg [J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 57 (1995) 289-300]. We develop a framework in which the False Discovery Proportion (FDP)--the number of false rejections divided by the number of rejections--is treated as a stochastic process. After obtaining the limiting distribution of the process, we demonstrate the validity of a class of procedures for controlling the False Discovery Rate (the expected FDP). We construct a confidence envelope for the whole FDP process. From these envelopes we derive confidence thresholds, for controlling the quantiles of the distribution of the FDP as well as controlling the number of false discoveries. We also investigate methods for estimating the p-value distribution

    Asymptotic properties of false discovery rate controlling procedures under independence

    Full text link
    We investigate the performance of a family of multiple comparison procedures for strong control of the False Discovery Rate (FDR\mathsf{FDR}). The FDR\mathsf{FDR} is the expected False Discovery Proportion (FDP\mathsf{FDP}), that is, the expected fraction of false rejections among all rejected hypotheses. A number of refinements to the original Benjamini-Hochberg procedure [1] have been proposed, to increase power by estimating the proportion of true null hypotheses, either implicitly, leading to one-stage adaptive procedures [4, 7] or explicitly, leading to two-stage adaptive (or plug-in) procedures [2, 21]. We use a variant of the stochastic process approach proposed by Genovese and Wasserman [11] to study the fluctuations of the FDP\mathsf{FDP} achieved with each of these procedures around its expectation, for independent tested hypotheses. We introduce a framework for the derivation of generic Central Limit Theorems for the FDP\mathsf{FDP} of these procedures, characterizing the associated regularity conditions, and comparing the asymptotic power of the various procedures. We interpret recently proposed one-stage adaptive procedures [4, 7] as fixed points in the iteration of well known two-stage adaptive procedures [2, 21].Comment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/08-EJS207 the Electronic Journal of Statistics (http://www.i-journals.org/ejs/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

    Interproximal Distance Analysis of Stereolithographic Casts Made by CAD-CAM Technology: An in Vitro Study

    Get PDF
    Statement of problem The accuracy of interproximal distances of the definitive casts made by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology is not yet known. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the interproximal distances of stereolithographic casts made by CAD-CAM technology with those of stone casts made by the conventional method. Material and methods Dentoform teeth were prepared for a single ceramic crown on the maxillary left central incisor, a 3-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) on the second premolar for a metal-ceramic crown, and a maxillary right first molar for a metal crown. Twenty digital intraoral impressions were made on the dentoform with an intraoral digital impression scanner. The digital impression files were used to fabricate 20 sets of stereolithographic casts, 10 definitive casts for the single ceramic crown, and 10 definitive casts for the FDP. Furthermore, 20 stone casts were made by the conventional method using polyvinyl siloxane impression material with a custom tray. Each definitive cast for stereolithographic cast and stone cast consisted of removable die-sectioned casts (DC) and nonsectioned solid casts (SC). Measurements of interproximal distance of each cast were made using CAD software to provide mean ±standard deviation (SD) values. Data were first analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), using different methods of cast fabrication (stone and stereolithography) as one within subject factor and different cast types (DC and SC) as another within subject factor. Post hoc analyses were performed to investigate the differences between stone and stereolithographic casts depending upon the results from the repeated measures ANOVA (α=.05). Results Analysis of interproximal distances showed the mean ±SD value of the single ceramic crown group was 31.2 ±24.5 μm for stone casts and 261.0 ±116.1 μm for stereolithographic casts, whereas the mean ±SD value for the FDP group was 46.0 ±35.0 μm for stone casts and 292.8 ±216.6 μm for stereolithographic casts. For both the single ceramic crown and the FDP groups, there were significant differences in interproximal distances between stereolithographic casts and stone casts (P\u3c.001). In addition, the comparisons of DC with SC of stone and stereolithographic casts for the single ceramic crown and FDP groups demonstrated there was statistically significant differences among interproximal distances between DC stereolithographic casts and SC stereolithographic casts only for the FDP group (P\u3c.001). Conclusions For both the single ceramic crown and the FDP groups, the stereolithographic cast group showed significantly larger interproximal distances than the stone cast group. In terms of the comparison between DC and SC, DC stereolithographic casts for the FDP group only showed significantly larger interproximal values than those of the SC stereolithographic casts for the FDP group
    corecore