Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding a Likelihood Q-Ratio Test #83

Closed
adam2392 opened this issue Nov 25, 2019 · 4 comments
Closed

Adding a Likelihood Q-Ratio Test #83

adam2392 opened this issue Nov 25, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@adam2392
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, I was wondering what your thoughts on adding a robust statistic, such as the LqrT either to replace the t-test, or to add an additional column in the statistical testing? A quick summary: Compared to Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests, it is more robust when the model is misspecified under a gross error model. See figure 9 of the paper for a most compelling result.

Proposed solution:
Adding the https://github.com/alyakin314/lqrt package into the requirements.txt and incorporating that into the statistical results dataframe result.

Reference:

  1. http://www3.stat.sinica.edu.tw/statistica/oldpdf/A27n422.pdf
@josesho
Copy link
Member

josesho commented Nov 25, 2019

Hi @adam2392 ,

I'm happy to receive a PR that implements this additional test in the results dataframe. You will need to do a decent job of explaining the test in the documentation as it is obscure.

Do you have any examples of this test being used in biomedical research papers?

Joses

@adam2392
Copy link
Contributor Author

adam2392 commented Dec 4, 2019

Hi @josesho so in terms of the documentation, would this just be adding documentation into:

  • tutorial.rst
  • a release note
    ?

Or are there additional files to change regarding this.

Do you have any examples of this test being used in biomedical research papers?

No because it is a new publication, but the test is proven to be more robust (compared to the t-test) in terms of power for even small changes away from a perfectly Gaussian model, and it is better then the Wilcoxon rank-sum test in this aspect. So in terms of biomedical data, this would be nice because typically no data is perfectly modeled as a single Gaussian. I am using it though for my own research now as a result. The paper and pip package came out of my university, so I found out about it as soon as it was published.

@alyakin314
Copy link

alyakin314 commented Dec 10, 2019

@adam2392
Adam, I suggest using both the equal_var=True and equal_var=False flags for the unpaired Lq-likelihood-ratio-type test (LqRT), similarly to how it's done for the t-test here . syntax should be almost identical to the one of the scipy's t-test.

also, just as a clarification LqRT does not assume a gross-error model, it assumes normal distribution, but degrades less if there is contamination in the sample.

lastly, there is a preprint that discusses this package specifically, as opposed to the general LqRT; it can be found here.

@josesho josesho mentioned this issue Dec 23, 2019
@josesho
Copy link
Member

josesho commented Dec 26, 2019

Closed with #89

@josesho josesho closed this as completed Dec 26, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants