Paper detail

Exact and asymptotic goodness-of-fit tests based on the maximum and its location of the empirical process

The supremum of the standardized empirical process is a promising statistic for testing whether the distribution function $F$ of i.i.d. real random variables is either equal to a given distribution function $F_0$ (hypothesis) or $F \ge F_0$ (one-sided alternative). Since \cite{r5} it is well-known that an affine-linear transformation of the suprema converge in distribution to the Gumbel law as the sample size tends to infinity. This enables the construction of an asymptotic level-$α$ test. However, the rate of convergence is extremely slow. As a consequence the probability of the type I error is much larger than $α$ even for sample sizes beyond $10.000$. Now, the standardization consists of the weight-function $1/\sqrt{F_0(x)(1-F_0(x))}$. Substituting the weight-function by a suitable random constant leads to a new test-statistic, for which we can derive the exact distribution (and the limit distribution) under the hypothesis. A comparison via a Monte-Carlo simulation shows that the new test is uniformly better than the Smirnov-test and an appropriately modified test due to \cite{r20}. Our methodology also works for the two-sided alternative $F \neq F_0$.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.