The Annals of Statistics

Decision theory results for one-sided multiple comparison procedures

Arthur Cohen and Harold B. Sackrowitz
Source: Ann. Statist. Volume 33, Number 1 (2005), 126-144.

Abstract

A resurgence of interest in multiple hypothesis testing has occurred in the last decade. Motivated by studies in genomics, microarrays, DNA sequencing, drug screening, clinical trials, bioassays, education and psychology, statisticians have been devoting considerable research energy in an effort to properly analyze multiple endpoint data. In response to new applications, new criteria and new methodology, many ad hoc procedures have emerged. The classical requirement has been to use procedures which control the strong familywise error rate (FWE) at some predetermined level α. That is, the probability of any false rejection of a true null hypothesis should be less than or equal to α. Finding desirable and powerful multiple test procedures is difficult under this requirement.

One of the more recent ideas is concerned with controlling the false discovery rate (FDR), that is, the expected proportion of rejected hypotheses which are, in fact, true. Many multiple test procedures do control the FDR.

A much earlier approach to multiple testing was formulated by Lehmann [Ann. Math. Statist. 23 (1952) 541–552 and 28 (1957) 1–25]. Lehmann’s approach is decision theoretic and he treats the multiple endpoints problem as a 2k finite action problem when there are k endpoints. This approach is appealing since unlike the FWE and FDR criteria, the finite action approach pays attention to false acceptances as well as false rejections. In this paper we view the multiple endpoints problem as a 2k finite action problem. We study the popular procedures single-step, step-down and step-up from the point of view of admissibility, Bayes and limit of Bayes properties. For our model, which is a prototypical one, and our loss function, we are able to demonstrate the following results under some fairly general conditions to be specified:

(i) The single-step procedure is admissible.

(ii) A sequence of prior distributions is given for which the step-down procedure is a limit of a sequence of Bayes procedures.

(iii) For a vector risk function, where each component is the risk for an individual testing problem, various admissibility and inadmissibility results are obtained.

In a companion paper [Cohen and Sackrowitz, Ann. Statist. 33 (2005) 145–158], we are able to give a characterization of Bayes procedures and their limits. The characterization yields a complete class and the additional useful result that the step-up procedure is inadmissible. The inadmissibility of step-up is demonstrated there for a more stringent loss function. Additional decision theoretic type results are also obtained in this paper.

First Page: Show Hide
Primary Subjects: 62F03, 62C15
Full-text: Open access
Links and Identifiers

Permanent link to this document: http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1112967701
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/009053604000000968
Zentralblatt MATH identifier: 02182558
Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet): MR2157798

References

Benjamini, Y. and Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 57 289--300.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1325392
Benjamini, Y. and Yekutieli, D. (2001). The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Ann. Statist. 29 1165--1188.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1869245
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aos/1013699998
Project Euclid: euclid.aos/1013699998
Zentralblatt MATH: 1041.62061
Cohen, A. and Sackrowitz, H. B. (1984). Decision theory results for vector risks with applications. Statist. Decisions Suppl. 1 159--176.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR785207
Cohen, A. and Sackrowitz, H. B. (2004). Monotonicity properties of multiple endpoint testing procedures. J. Statist. Plann. Inference 125 17--30.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR2086886
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2003.10.008
Zentralblatt MATH: 1074.62011
Cohen, A. and Sackrowitz, H. B. (2005). Characterization of Bayes procedures for multiple endpoint problems and inadmissibility of the step-up procedure. Ann. Statist. 33 145--158.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR2157799
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/009053604000000986
Project Euclid: euclid.aos/1112967702
Zentralblatt MATH: 1066.62010
Dudoit, S., Shaffer, J. P. and Boldrick, J. C. (2003). Multiple hypothesis testing in microarray experiments. Statist. Sci. 18 71--103.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1997066
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/ss/1056397487
Project Euclid: euclid.ss/1056397487
Zentralblatt MATH: 1048.62099
Efron, B., Tibshirani, R., Storey, J. D. and Tusher, V. (2001). Empirical Bayes analysis and a microarray experiment. Technical Report 216, Dept. Statistics, Stanford Univ.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1946571
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1198/016214501753382129
Zentralblatt MATH: 1073.62511
Finner, H. and Roters, M. (2002). Multiple hypotheses testing and expected number of type I errors. Ann. Statist. 30 220--238.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1892662
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aos/1015362191
Project Euclid: euclid.aos/1015362191
Zentralblatt MATH: 1012.62020
Finner, H. and Strassburger, K. (2002). The partitioning principle: A powerful tool in multiple decision theory. Ann. Statist. 30 1194--1213.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1926174
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aos/1031689023
Project Euclid: euclid.aos/1031689023
Zentralblatt MATH: 1029.62064
Hochberg, Y. (1988). A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75 800--802.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR995126
Zentralblatt MATH: 0661.62067
Hochberg, Y. and Tamhane, A. C. (1987). Multiple Comparison Procedures. Wiley, New York.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR914493
Zentralblatt MATH: 0731.62125
Krishnaiah, P. R. and Pathak, P. K. (1967). Tests for the equality of covariance matrices under the intraclass correlation model. Ann. Math. Statist. 38 1286--1288.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR214226
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aoms/1177698801
Lehmann, E. L. (1952). Testing multiparameter hypotheses. Ann. Math. Statist. 23 541--552.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR52737
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aoms/1177729333
Lehmann, E. L. (1957). A theory of some multiple decision problems. I. Ann. Math. Statist. 28 1--25.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR84952
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aoms/1177707034
Lehmann, E. L. (1986). Testing Statistical Hypotheses, 2nd ed. Wiley, New York.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR852406
Zentralblatt MATH: 0608.62020
Marcus, R., Peritz, E. and Gabriel, K. R. (1976). On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika 63 655--660.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR468056
Zentralblatt MATH: 0353.62037
Marden, J. I. (1982). Minimal complete classes of tests of hypotheses with multivariate one-sided alternatives. Ann. Statist. 10 962--970.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR663447
Matthes, T. K. and Truax, D. R. (1967). Tests of composite hypotheses for the multivariate exponential family. Ann. Math. Statist. 38 681--697.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR208745
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aoms/1177698862
Mood, A. M., Graybill, F. A. and Boes, D. C. (1974). Introduction to the Theory of Statistics, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Zentralblatt MATH: 0277.62002
Robertson, T., Wright, F. T. and Dykstra, R. L. (1988). Order Restricted Statistical Inference. Wiley, New York.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR961262
Zentralblatt MATH: 0645.62028
Sarkar, S. (2002). Some results on false discovery rate in stepwise multiple testing procedures. Ann. Statist. 30 239--257.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR1892663
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aos/1015362192
Project Euclid: euclid.aos/1015362192
Zentralblatt MATH: 1101.62349
Shaffer, J. P. (1995). Multiple hypothesis testing. Annual Review of Psychology 46 561--584.
Stefánsson, G., Kim, W. and Hsu, J. C. (1988). On confidence sets in multiple comparisons. In Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics IV (S. S. Gupta and J. O. Berger, eds.) 2 89--104. Springer, New York.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR927125
Stein, C. M. (1956). The admissibility of Hotelling's $T^2$-test. Ann. Math. Statist. 27 616--623.
Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet): MR80413
Digital Object Identifier: doi:10.1214/aoms/1177728171

2012 © Institute of Mathematical Statistics

The Annals of Statistics

The Annals of Statistics