Consider $(X_1, ... , X_n)$ an n-sample of a uniform distribution $U[0; \theta]$, where $\theta > 0$ is an unknown parameter and $\theta_0 > 0$. One wishes to test $H_0:\theta=\theta_0$ against $H_1:\theta \neq \theta_0$.

I need to propose an asymptotic test of level $\alpha$ using the estimate $\widehat{\theta}_n =2\bar{X}$ and a Gaussian approximation.

From Central Limit Theorem.

\begin{equation*} \sqrt{n}\left(2\bar{X} - \theta\right)\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{(l)}\mathcal{N}\left(0, \dfrac{\theta^2}{3} \right) \end{equation*} And in the case of maximun likelihood we have

$$\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\theta}_n-\theta)\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{(l)} 0$$

see this question Weak Convergence with Uniform Distribution $U[0;\theta]$ and Method of Moments.

We know that

Theorem(Wilks): Consider $(E,\mathcal{E},\mathbb{P}_{\theta},\theta \in \Theta), > \Theta\in\mathbb{R}^p$ a parametric regular model dominated by some probaility measure $\mu$, with likelihood $\mathcal{L}(x,\theta)$. Consider also the test problem $H_0:\theta=\theta_0$ against $H_1:\theta\neq\theta_0$. Then with similar notatio $$\Lambda_n=\frac{\mathcal{L}(X_1,...,X_n,\theta_0)}{\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}\mathcal{L}(X_1,...,X_n,\theta)}$$ One has that $$-2\ln\Lambda_n\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{(l)}\chi^2(p)$$

The rejection region of this asymptotic test is then $W=\lbrace > -\ln\Lambda_n > q_{1-\alpha}\rbrace$ where $q_{1-\alpha}$ is the $1-\alpha$ quatile of the $\chi^2(p)$ distribution

In this case we have $H_0:\theta= \dfrac{\theta^2}{3}$ against $H_1:\theta \neq \dfrac{\theta^2}{3}$.

Is correct the assumption above?

How can apply Theorem(Wilks) if $\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\theta}_n-\theta)\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{(l)} 0$?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think I understand what $\theta=\theta^2/3$ has to do with anything... (Also your little > marks to make the box are screwing up your formatting in a few places.) $\endgroup$ – Ian May 19 '17 at 20:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Ian to apply the Theorem of Wilks $\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}\mathcal{L}(X_1,...,X_n,\theta$ is the Maximun likelihood estimator but in this case $\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\theta}_n-\theta)\xrightarrow[n\rightarrow\infty]{(l)} 0$ What can I do inthis case? $\endgroup$ – Cyberguille May 19 '17 at 21:03

The MME $T = 2\bar X$ is not a good estimator of $\theta$ for random observations $X_1, X_2, \dots, X_n$ from $\mathsf{Unif}(0, \theta).$ Nevertheless, it can be used to test $H_0: \theta = \theta_0$ against $H_a: \theta \ne \theta_0,$ at level 5%---even if not with optimal power.

The null distribution of the test statistic $Z = \frac{T - \theta_0}{\theta_0/\sqrt{3n}}$ is very nearly standard normal for $n$ larger than about 10. Thus for a 5% level test, one rejects for $|Z| > 1.96.$

The only possibly contentious point is the near normality of $Z$. The brief simulation below illustrates approximate normality for $n = 12.$

m = 10^6;  n = 12;  th = 10;  x = runif(n*m, 0, th)
DTA = matrix(x, nrow=m) # each row a sample of size n
a = rowMeans(DTA);  t=2*a;  z = (t - th)/(th/sqrt(3*n))
hist(z, prob=T, col="skyblue2", ylim=c(0,.4))
curve(dnorm(x), lwd=2, col="red", add=T)
shapiro.test(z[1:2000])  # test the first 2000 values of z for normality

        Shapiro-Wilk normality test

data:  z[1:2000] 
W = 0.9995, p-value = 0.8788

The histogram below shows a million values of $Z$ (based on $n = 12$ and $\theta = 10$) along with the standard normal CDF

enter image description here

Notes: (a) The CLT converges rapidly for IID uniform observations. For some years, $Z = U_1 + U_2 + \cdots + U_{12}-6,$ where $U_i \stackrel{iid}{\sim} \mathsf{Unif}(0,1),$ was used to simulate standard normal random variables, mainly with satisfactory results. (Better methods are available now.) (b) The MLE is a far better estimator of $\theta$ and it has a generalized beta distribution. (c) Because you are not using the MLE, discussion of it is irrelevant to the problem you ask.

  • $\begingroup$ Interesting your answer, but I asking for a way to apply Theorem(Wilks), so I need to build an asymptotic test, for this reason I need to use MLE $\endgroup$ – Cyberguille May 23 '17 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ Is it possible that you are mixing up MME and MLE? What is $p?$ $\endgroup$ – BruceET May 23 '17 at 13:53
  • $\begingroup$ Well I try to use Likelihood-ratio test in this question you can find more elements about $p$ but basically $p= $ the number of free parameters under $\theta$ - the number of free parameters under $\theta_0$ $\endgroup$ – Cyberguille May 23 '17 at 14:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So $p = 1.$ $Z^2 \sim \mathsf{Chisq}(1).$ Yours is an 'interesting' approach. Good luck with it. $\endgroup$ – BruceET May 23 '17 at 16:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.