Paper detail

Universal and Composite Hypothesis Testing via Mismatched Divergence

For the universal hypothesis testing problem, where the goal is to decide between the known null hypothesis distribution and some other unknown distribution, Hoeffding proposed a universal test in the nineteen sixties. Hoeffding's universal test statistic can be written in terms of Kullback-Leibler (K-L) divergence between the empirical distribution of the observations and the null hypothesis distribution. In this paper a modification of Hoeffding's test is considered based on a relaxation of the K-L divergence test statistic, referred to as the mismatched divergence. The resulting mismatched test is shown to be a generalized likelihood-ratio test (GLRT) for the case where the alternate distribution lies in a parametric family of the distributions characterized by a finite dimensional parameter, i.e., it is a solution to the corresponding composite hypothesis testing problem. For certain choices of the alternate distribution, it is shown that both the Hoeffding test and the mismatched test have the same asymptotic performance in terms of error exponents. A consequence of this result is that the GLRT is optimal in differentiating a particular distribution from others in an exponential family. It is also shown that the mismatched test has a significant advantage over the Hoeffding test in terms of finite sample size performance. This advantage is due to the difference in the asymptotic variances of the two test statistics under the null hypothesis. In particular, the variance of the K-L divergence grows linearly with the alphabet size, making the test impractical for applications involving large alphabet distributions. The variance of the mismatched divergence on the other hand grows linearly with the dimension of the parameter space, and can hence be controlled through a prudent choice of the function class defining the mismatched divergence.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.