Paper detail

The Adequate Bootstrap

There is a fundamental disconnect between what is tested in a model adequacy test, and what we would like to test. The usual approach is to test the null hypothesis "Model M is the true model." However, Model M is never the true model. A model might still be useful even if we have enough data to reject it. In this paper, we present a technique to assess the adequacy of a model from the philosophical standpoint that we know the model is not true, but we want to know if it is useful. Our solution to this problem is to measure the parameter uncertainty in our estimates caused by the model uncertainty. We use bootstrap inference on samples of a smaller size, for which the model cannot be rejected. We use a model adequacy test to choose a bootstrap size with limited probability of rejecting the model and perform inference for samples of this size based on a nonparametric bootstrap. Our idea is that if we base our inference on a sample size at which we do not reject the model, then we should be happy with this inference, because we would have been confident in it if our original dataset had been this size.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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.