| Literature DB >> 29755310 |
Elisa Perrone1, Andreas Rappold2, Werner G Müller2.
Abstract
Optimum experimental design theory has recently been extended for parameter estimation in copula models. The use of these models allows one to gain in flexibility by considering the model parameter set split into marginal and dependence parameters. However, this separation also leads to the natural issue of estimating only a subset of all model parameters. In this work, we treat this problem with the application of the [Formula: see text]-optimality to copula models. First, we provide an extension of the corresponding equivalence theory. Then, we analyze a wide range of flexible copula models to highlight the usefulness of [Formula: see text]-optimality in many possible scenarios. Finally, we discuss how the usage of the introduced design criterion also relates to the more general issue of copula selection and optimal design for model discrimination.Entities:
Keywords: Copula selection; Design discrimination; Stochastic dependence; [Formula: see text]-optimality
Year: 2016 PMID: 29755310 PMCID: PMC5935038 DOI: 10.1007/s10260-016-0375-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Stat Methods Appt ISSN: 1613-981X
Fig. 1Design points (first column), weights (second column), sensitivity function (continuous line) and weights (bars) of the -optimal design for
Fig. 2Sensitivity functions (continuous lines) and weights (bars) for D-optimal (left column) and -optimal (right column) designs for Clayton-Gumbel (first line) and Frank-Gumbel (second line) with and
Losses in -efficiency in percent for , and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe–Frank | Clayton–Gumbel | |||||
| 0.1 | 34.94 | 38.80 | 41.37 | 49.85 | 49.45 | 45.10 |
| 0.5 | 42.36 | 38.20 | 41.83 | 43.65 | 39.27 | 39.03 |
| 0.9 | 55.11 | 47.23 | 44.15 | 37.87 | 34.65 | 37.78 |
| Joe–Clayton | Frank–Gumbel | |||||
| 0.1 | 35.92 | 36.35 | 39.01 | 47.13 | 48.29 | 46.17 |
| 0.5 | 45.37 | 43.17 | 45.53 | 37.65 | 34.41 | 34.37 |
| 0.9 | 49.92 | 48.72 | 45.36 | 38.51 | 34.19 | 36.26 |
Losses in -efficiency in percent for and by comparing the true copula model with the assumed one
| True copula | Assumed copula | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C–G | F–G | J–C | J–F | |
| Clayton–Gumbel (C–G) | 0.00 | 28.44 | 7.43 | 19.07 |
| Frank–Gumbel (F–G) | 16.09 | 0.00 | 30.17 | 19.51 |
| Joe–Clayton (J–C) | 4.25 | 34.27 | 0.00 | 13.51 |
| Joe–Frank (J–F) | 15.13 | 13.97 | 9.52 | 0.00 |
Fig. 3Sensitivity functions (continuous lines) and design weights (bars) of the D-optimal design for the Weibull case as reported in Kim and Flournoy (2015) (left), and for asymmetric Clayton with (right); filled circle ; filled square ; filled inverted triangle ; filled triangle
Losses in D-efficiency in percent for crossed comparison between the optimal designs found for the Weibull model as reported in Kim and Flournoy (2015) and all our models
| True model | Assumed model | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weibull | Our models | |||
| min | max | min | max | |
| Weibull | 0.00 | 0.00 | 9.43 | 10.18 |
| Our models | 17.78 | 71.65 | 0.00 | 3.37 |
Fig. 4Sensitivity functions (continuous lines) and design weights (bars) of D-optimal designs (first row) and -optimal designs (second row) for the Weibull case for asymmetric Clayton with (left column), and for (right column); filled circle ; filled square ; filled inverted triangle ; filled triangle