We gratefully acknowledge support from
the Simons Foundation and member institutions.
Full-text links:


Current browse context:


Change to browse by:

References & Citations


(what is this?)
CiteULike logo BibSonomy logo Mendeley logo del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo ScienceWISE logo

Statistics > Methodology

Title: Beyond Neyman-Pearson

Abstract: A standard practice in statistical hypothesis testing is to mention the p-value alongside the accept/reject decision. We show the advantages of mentioning an e-value instead. With p-values, we cannot use an extreme observation (e.g. $p \ll \alpha$) for getting better frequentist decisions. With e-values we can, since they provide Type-I risk control in a generalized Neyman-Pearson setting with the decision task (a general loss function) determined post-hoc, after observation of the data - thereby providing a handle on "roving $\alpha$'s". When Type-II risks are taken into consideration, the only admissible decision rules in the post-hoc setting turn out to be e-value-based. We also propose to replace confidence intervals and distributions by the *e-posterior*, which provides valid post-hoc frequentist uncertainty assessments irrespective of prior correctness: if the prior is chosen badly, e-intervals get wide rather than wrong, suggesting the e-posterior minimax decision rule as a safer alternative for Bayes decisions. The resulting "quasi-conditional paradigm" addresses foundational and practical issues in statistical inference.
Subjects: Methodology (stat.ME)
Cite as: arXiv:2205.00901 [stat.ME]
  (or arXiv:2205.00901v1 [stat.ME] for this version)

Submission history

From: Peter Grünwald [view email]
[v1] Mon, 2 May 2022 13:28:42 GMT (167kb,D)

Link back to: arXiv, form interface, contact.