Simulating the significance level of a t-test in R - r

The following code generates 10000 t-tests on a custom distribution I have created.
> x <- replicate(10000,{
t.test(rcn(20,.25,25), mu=0, alternative="greater")
})
I am constructing an empirical level of significance and so I am interested in the number of test-statistics that are greather than the critical value of the respective t-distribution, which is 1.729 (for a t-distribution with 19 degrees of freedom).
How can I select (and count) these test-statistics here? The ratio of their number over 10000, the total number of simulations, will give me my empirical level of significance.

You can directly access the test statistic of each t.test in replicate. For example:
x <- replicate(10000, {
t.test(rcn(20,.25,25), mu=0, alternative="greater")$statistic
})
This returns a vector of t-values.
You can compare it with your critical value and count the TRUEs:
crit <- 1.729
sum(x > crit)

Related

Test for Poisson residuals in the analysis of variance model

I try to find any way for test Poisson residuals like normals in aov(). In my hypothetical example:
# For normal distribution
x <- rep(seq(from=10, to=50, by=0.5),6)
y1 <- rnorm(length(x), mean=10, sd=1.5)
#Normality test in aov residuals
y1.av<-aov(y1 ~ x)
shapiro.test(y1.av$res)
# Shapiro-Wilk normality test
#
#data: y1.av$res
#W = 0.99782, p-value = 0.7885
Sounds silly, OK!!
Now, I'll like to make a same approche but for Poisson distribution:
# For Poisson distribution
x <- rep(seq(from=10, to=50, by=0.5),6)
y2 <- rpois(x, lambda=10)
#Normality test in aov residuals
y2.av<-aov(y2 ~ x)
poisson.test(y2.av$res)
Error in poisson.test(y2.av$res) :
'x' must be finite, nonnegative, and integer
There is any stat approach for make this?
Thanks!
You could analyse your data below a counting context. Discrete data, such as variables of Poisson nature, can be analysed based on observed frequencies. You can formulate hypothesis testing for this task. Being your data y you can contrast the null hypothesis that y follows a Poisson distribution with some parameter lambda against the alternative hypothesis that y does not come from the Poisson distribution. Let's sketch the test with you data:
#Data
set.seed(123)
# For Poisson distribution
x <- rep(seq(from=10, to=50, by=0.5),6)
y2 <- rpois(x, lambda=10)
Now we obtain the counts, which are elemental for the test:
#Values
df <- as.data.frame(table(y2),stringsAsFactors = F)
df$y2 <- as.integer(df$y2)
After that we must separate the observed values O and its groups or categories classes. Both elements constitute the y variable:
#Observed values
O <- df$Freq
#Groups
classes <- df$y2
As we are testing a Poisson distribution, we must compute the lambda parameter. This can be obtained with Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE). The MLE for Poisson is the mean (considering we have counts and groups in order to determine this value), so we compute it with next code:
#MLE
meanval <- sum(O*classes)/sum(O)
Now, we have to get the probabilities of each class:
#Probs
prob <- dpois(classes,meanval)
Poisson distribution can go to infinite values, so we must compute the probability for the values that can be greater than our last group in order to have probabilities that sum to one:
prhs <- 1-sum(prob)
This probability can be easily added to the last value of our group in order to transform to account for values greater or equal to it (For example, instead of only having the probability that y equals to 20 we can have the probability that y is greater or equal to 20):
#Add probability
prob[length(prob)]<-prob[length(prob)]+prhs
With this we can conduct a goodness of fit test using chisq.test() function in R. It requires the observed values O and the probabilities prob that we have computed. Just a reminder that this test uses to set wrong degrees of freedom, so we can correct it by the formulation of the test that uses k-q-1 degrees. Where k is the number of groups and q is the number of parameters computed (we have computed one parameter with MLE). Next the test:
chisq.test(O,p=prob)
The output:
Chi-squared test for given probabilities
data: O
X-squared = 7.6692, df = 17, p-value = 0.9731
The key value from the test is the X-squared value which is the test statistic. We can reuse the value to obtain the real p-value (In our example, we have k=18 and minus 2, the degrees of freedom are 16).
The p.value can be obtained with next code:
p.value <- 1-pchisq(7.6692, 16)
The output:
[1] 0.9581098
As this value is not greater that known significance levels we do not reject the null hypothesis and we can affirm that y comes from a Poisson distribution.

How to calculate individual restricted mean survival time (RMST) in R?

I encountered some issues when calculating restricted mean survival time (RMST) in R and I made some attempts.
Here is the idea that I tried to calculate the RMST by myself.
i) I fitted a cox regression model to get estimated function of h(t), and I deploy individual covariables to calculate individual h(t);
ii) I derived individual survival curve S(t) by the above individual h(t);
iii) I then calculated individual RMST by the above individual S(t) with the following formula: RMST = integrate(S(t)) by 0 to tau. (I don't know how to put a formal formula here and I am sure you can understand what I am saying).
I have tried the above method to calculate individual RMST with the following R code:
# load R package
library(survRM2)
library(survival)
# generate example
D <- rmst2.sample.data()
time <- D$time
status <- D$status
x <- D[,c(4,6,7)]
# fit cox regression model with weibull baseline
fit<-survreg(Surv(time,status)~ x[[1]] + x[[2]]+ x[[3]],data = D,dist = "weibull")
# get cox regression coefficients of covariables
beta=fit$coefficients
# get paramaters within baseline hazard
gamma.weibull=fit$scale
# cutomize a function to calculate individual hazard
hazard <- function(u,x1,x2,x3) {
gamma.weibull*u^(gamma.weibull-1)*exp(beta[1]+beta[2]*x1+beta[3]*x2+beta[4]*x3)
}
# cutomize a function to calculate individual survival
surv <-function(t,x1,x2,x3) {
sapply(t,function(z){
exp(-integrate(hazard,lower=0,upper=z,x1=x1,x2=x2,x3=x3)$value)
}
)
}
rmst <- c() # genrate a empty vector
for(i in 1:312) { # 312 is the sample size
rmst[i]=integrate(surv,0,5,x1=x[[1]][i],x2=x[[2]][i],x3=x[[3]][i])$value
}
# Error in integrate(surv, 0, 5, x1 = x[[1]][i], x2 = x[[2]][i], x3 = x[[3]][i]) :
# the integral is probably divergent
I have three questions:
1) Is there anything wrong about my idea or computational process?
2) In the step iii), there are some cases that integrals are non-integrable (that is, integrals do not converge). Is there any solution, or should I use approximate evaluation?
3) One last shoot, is there any better method to calculate this individual RMST?

Wald Testing Bootstrapped Estimates in R

I've performed multiple regression (specifically quantile regression with multiple predictors using quantreg in R). I have estimated the standard error and confidence intervals based on bootstrapping the estimates. Now i want to test whether the estimates at different quantiles differ significantly from one another (Wald test would be preferable). How can i do this?
FML <- as.formula(outcome ~ VAR + c1 + c2 + c3)
quantiles <- c(0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
q.Result <- rqs(FML, tau=quantiles, data, method="fn", na.action=na.omit)
q.Summary <- summary(Q.mod, se="boot", R=10000, bsmethod="mcmb",
covariance=TRUE)
From q.Summary i've extracted the bootstrapped (ie 10000) estimates (ie vector of 10000 bootstrapped B values).
Note: In reality I'm not especially interested comparing the estimates from all my covariates (in FML), I'm primarily interested comparing the estimates for VAR. What is the best way to proceed?
Consulted with a colleague, and we resolved that estimates from different taus could be compared using Wald test as follows.
From object rqs produced by
q.Summary <- summary(Q.mod, se="boot", R=10000, bsmethod="mcmb", covariance=TRUE)
you extract the bootstrapped Beta values for variable of interest in this case VAR, the first covariate in FML for each tau
boot.Bs <- sapply(q.Summary, function (x) x[["B"]][,2])
B0 <- coef(summary(lm(FML, data)))[2,1] # Extract liner estimate data linear estimate
Then compute wald statistic and get pvalue with number of quantiles for degrees of freedom
Wald <- sum(apply(boot.Bs, 2, function (x) ((mean(x)-B0)^2)/var(x)))
Pvalue <- pchisq(Wald, ncol(boot.Bs), lower=FALSE)
You also want to verify that bootstrapped Betas are normally distributed, and if you're running many taus it can be cumbersome to check all those QQ plots so just sum them by row
qqnorm(apply(boot.Bs, 1, sum))
qqline(apply(boot.Bs, 1, sum), col = 2)
This seems to be working, and if anyone can think of anything wrong with my solution, please share

Finding critical values for the Pearson correlation coefficient

I'd like to use R to find the critical values for the Pearson correlation coefficient.
This has proved difficult to find in search engines since the standard variable for the Pearson correlation coefficient is itself r. In turn, I'm finding a lot of r critical value tables (rather than how to find this by using the statistical package R).
I'm looking for a function that will provide output like the following:
I'm comfortable finding the correlation with:
cor(x,y)
However, I'd also like to find the critical values.
Is there a function I can use to enter n (or degrees of freedom) as well as alpha in order to find the critical value?
The significance of a correlation coefficient, r, is determined by converting r to a t-statistic and then finding the significance of that t-value at the degrees of freedom that correspond to the sample size, n. So, you can use R to find the critical t-value and then convert that value back to a correlation coefficient to find the critical correlation coefficient.
critical.r <- function( n, alpha = .05 ) {
df <- n - 2
critical.t <- qt(alpha/2, df, lower.tail = F)
critical.r <- sqrt( (critical.t^2) / ( (critical.t^2) + df ) )
return(critical.r)
}
# Example usage: Critical correlation coefficient at sample size of n = 100
critical.r( 100 )
The general structure of hypothesis testing is kind of a mish-mash of two systems: Fisherian and Neyman-Pearson. Statisticians understand the differences but rarely does this get clearly presented in undergraduate stats classes. R was designed by and intended for statisticians as a toolbox, so they constructed a function named cor.test that will deliver a p-value (part of the Fisherian tradition) as well as a confidence interval for "r" (derived on the basis of the Neyman-Pearson formalism.) Fisher and Neyman had bitter disputes in their lifetime. The "critical value" terminology is part of the N-P testing strategy. It is equivalent to building a confidence interval and finding the particular statistic that reaches exactly a threshold value of 0.05 significance.
The code for constructing the inferential statistics in cor.test is available with:
methods(cor.test)
getAnywhere(cor.test.default)
# scroll down
method <- "Pearson's product-moment correlation"
#-----partial code----
r <- cor(x, y)
df <- n - 2L
ESTIMATE <- c(cor = r)
PARAMETER <- c(df = df)
STATISTIC <- c(t = sqrt(df) * r/sqrt(1 - r^2))
p <- pt(STATISTIC, df)
# ---- omitted some set up and error checking ----
# this is the confidence interval section------
z <- atanh(r)
sigma <- 1/sqrt(n - 3)
cint <- switch(alternative, less = c(-Inf, z + sigma *
qnorm(conf.level)), greater = c(z - sigma * qnorm(conf.level),
Inf), two.sided = z + c(-1, 1) * sigma * qnorm((1 +
conf.level)/2))
cint <- tanh(cint)
So now you know how R does it. Notice that there is no "critical value" mentioned. I suspect that your hope was to find some table where a tabulation of "r" and "df" was laid out displaying the minimum "r" that would reach a significance of 0.05 for a given 'df'. Such a table could be built but that's not how this particular toolbox is constructed. You should now have the tools to build it yourself.
I would do the same. But if you are using a Spearman correlation you need to convert t into r using a different formula.
just change the last line before the return in the function with this one:
critical.r <- sqrt(((critical.t^2) / (df)) + 1)

R: Fitting Chi-squared distribution with large x range

It is quite easy to get a good fit of a chi-squared distribution for a limited range:
library(MASS)
nnn <- 1000
set.seed(101)
chii <- rchisq(nnn,4, ncp = 0) ## Generating a chi-sq distribution
chi_df <- fitdistr(chii,"chi-squared",start=list(df=3),method="BFGS") ## Fitting
chi_k <- chi_df[[1]][1] ## Degrees of freedom
chi_hist <- hist(chii,breaks=50,freq=FALSE) ## PLotting the histogram
curve(dchisq(x,df=chi_k),add=TRUE,col="green",lwd=3) ## Plotting the line
However, assume I have a data set where the distribution is spread out over the X-axis, and its new values are instead given by something like:
chii <- 5*rchisq(nnn,4, ncp = 0)
Without knowing this multiplicative factor 5 for a real data set, how do I normalize the rchisq()/ complex data to get a good fit with fitdistr()?
Thanks in advance for your help!
You will have to loop across degrees of freedom to find the best fit for your data. First you probably know that the mean of the chi-squared distribution is the degree of freedom, let's use that to adjust your data and solve your problem.
In summary you loop across possible degrees of freedom to find the one that best fits your adjusted data.
library(MASS)
nnn <- 1000
set.seed(101)
x <- round(runif(1,1,100)) # generate a random multiplier
chii <- x*rchisq(nnn,4, ncp = 0) ## Generating a shifted chi-sq distribution
max_df <- 100 # max degree of freedom to test (here from 1 to 100)
chi_df_disp <- rep(NA,max_df)
# loop across degree of freedom
for (i in 1:max_df) {
chii_adjusted <- (chii/mean(chii))*i # Adjust the chi-sq distribution so that the mean matches the tested degree of freedom
chi_fit <- fitdistr(chii_adjusted,"chi-squared",start=list(df=i),method="BFGS") ## Fitting
chi_df_disp[i] <- chi_fit$estimate/i # This is going to give you the dispersion between the fitted df and the tested df
}
# Find the value with the smallest dispersion (i.e. the best match between the estimated df and the tested df)
real_df <- which.min(abs(chi_df_disp-1))
print(real_df) # print the real degree of freedom after correction
Now you can use the "real" degree of freedom to adjust you chi-squared distribution and plot the theoretical distribution line.
chii_adjusted <- (chii/mean(chii))*real_df
chi_hist <- hist(chii_adjusted,breaks=50,freq=FALSE) ## PLotting the histogram
curve(dchisq(x,df=real_df),add=TRUE,col="green",lwd=3) ## Plotting the line

Resources