Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a222637a0d89c60e

Jump to content

Closed testing procedure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In statistics, the closed testing procedure[1] is a general method for performing more than one hypothesis test simultaneously.

The closed testing principle

[edit]

Suppose there are k hypotheses H1,..., Hk to be tested and the overall type I error rate is α. The closed testing principle allows the rejection of any one of these elementary hypotheses, say Hi, if all possible intersection hypotheses involving Hi can be rejected by using valid local level α tests; the adjusted p-value is the largest among those hypotheses. It controls the family-wise error rate for all the k hypotheses at level α in the strong sense.

Example

[edit]

Suppose there are three hypotheses H1,H2, and H3 to be tested and the overall type I error rate is 0.05. Then H1 can be rejected at level α if H1H2H3, H1H2, H1H3 and H1 can all be rejected using valid tests with α = 0.05.

Special cases

[edit]

The Holm–Bonferroni method is a special case of a closed test procedure for which each intersection null hypothesis is tested using the simple Bonferroni test. As such, it controls the family-wise error rate for all the k hypotheses at level α in the strong sense.

Multiple test procedures developed using the graphical approach for constructing and illustrating multiple test procedures[2] are a subclass of closed testing procedures.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. Marcus, R; Peritz, E; Gabriel, KR (1976). "On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance". Biometrika. 63 (3): 655–660. doi:10.1093/biomet/63.3.655. JSTOR 2335748.
  2. Bretz, F; Maurer, W; Brannath, W; Posch, M (2009). "A graphical approach to sequentially rejective multiple test procedures". Stat Med. 28 (4): 586–604. doi:10.1002/sim.3495. S2CID 12068118.