Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 33 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 51 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 24 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 26 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 74 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 188 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 362 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 34 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

A Heavily Right Strategy for Integrating Dependent Studies in Any Dimension (2501.01065v1)

Published 2 Jan 2025 in stat.ME, math.ST, and stat.TH

Abstract: Recently, there has been a surge of interest in hypothesis testing methods for combining dependent studies without explicitly assessing their dependence. Among these, the Cauchy combination test (CCT) stands out for its approximate validity and power, leveraging a heavy-tail approximation insensitive to dependence. However, CCT is highly sensitive to large $p$-values and inverting it to construct confidence regions can result in regions lacking compactness, convexity, or connectivity. This article proposes a "heavily right" strategy by excluding the left half of the Cauchy distribution in the combination rule, retaining CCT's resilience to dependence while resolving its sensitivity to large $p$-values. Moreover, the Half-Cauchy combination as well as the harmonic mean approach guarantees bounded and convex confidence regions, distinguishing them as the only known combination tests with all such desirable properties. Efficient and accurate algorithms are introduced for implementing both methods. Additionally, we develop a divide-and-combine strategy for constructing confidence regions for high-dimensional mean estimation using the Half-Cauchy method, and empirically illustrate its advantages over the Hotelling $T2$ approach. To demonstrate the practical utility of our Half-Cauchy approach, we apply it to network meta-analysis, constructing simultaneous confidence intervals for treatment effect comparisons across multiple clinical trials.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 1 post and received 2 likes.