4.4 Testing with Nuisance Parameters

1 Nuisance Parameters

Sometimes there are extra unknown parameters which we are not of direct interest. Like for P={Pθ,λ|(θ,λ)Λ}, we test H0:θΘ0 vs H1:θΘ1, here θ is parameter of interest, and λ is nuisance parameter.
The issue is that λ is unknown, but might affect Type I error or power of a given test.

2 UMPU Multivariate Tests

2.1 Multiparameter Exponential Families

Assume Xpθ,λ=eθTT(x)+λTU(x)A(θ,λ)h(x), where θRs,λRr are both unknown. How to test H0:θΘ0 vs H1:θΘ1?
The idea is to condition on U(X) to eliminate dependence on λ.

  1. Sufficiency reduction:
    Let (T(X),U(X))qθ,λ(t,u)=eθTt+λTuA(θ,λ)g(t,u), here gdtdu is the push-forward of hdμ.
  2. Condition on U(X): qθ(t|u)=qθ,λ(t,u)qθ,λ(z,u)dz=eθTt+λTuA(θ,λ)g(t,u)eθTz+λTuA(θ,λ)g(z,u)dz=eθTtg(t,u)eθTzg(z,u)dz=eθTtBu(θ)g(t,u).
  3. Conditional test: test H0:θΘ0 vs H1:θΘ1 in s parameter model Qu={qθ(t|u):θΘ}.

If s=1, this family has MLR in T. Even if s>1, we still have gotten rid of λ.

2.2 UMPU for Multi Exponential Families

Theorem

Let P be full rank exponential family with densities pθ,λ(x)=eθT(x)+λTU(x)A(θ,λ)h(x), θR,λRr,(θ,λ)Ω open.

  1. To test H0:θθ0 vs H1:θ>θ0, there is a UMPU test ϕ(x)=ψ(T(x);U(x)), where ψ(t;u)={1,t>c(u),γ(u),t=c(u),0,t<c(u), where c(u),γ(u) are chosen to make Eθ0[ϕ(X)|U(X)=u]=α.
  2. To test H0:θ=θ0 vs H1:θθ0, there is a UMPU test ϕ(x)=ψ(T(x);U(x)), where ψ(t;u)={1,t<c1(u) or t>c2(u),γ(u),t=ci(u),0,c1(u)<t<c2(u), where c(u),γ(u) are chosen to make Eθ0[ϕ(X)|U(X)=u]=α,Eθ0[T(X)(ϕ(X)α)|U(X)=u]=0.

Note that λ has disappeared from the problem.

The above example rejects for

This is equivalent to reject for marginally extreme T=nXS2, where S2=1n1i=1n(XiX)2=1n1(i=1nXi22Xi=1nXi+nX2)=1n1(||X||2nX2), so T=n1nX||X||2nX2=n1R1R2 for R=nX||X||=1n1nTX||X||=cos1n,X.
Geometrically, T=nXS2=||Proj1nX||||Proj1nX||n1sgn(X).
Pasted image 20241214145313.png|400

3 Permutation Test

Even if we don't get a UMPU test at the end, conditioning on null sufficient statistics still helps.