论文标题
最小发散估计器,最大似然和广义引导程序
Minimum divergence estimators, Maximum Likelihood and the generalized bootstrap
论文作者
论文摘要
本文试图设定使用某些双层索引的理由,从经典的最大似然定义开始,并将相应的推理基本原理调整为最小化模型和数据量度扩展数据之间的这些索引的基本原理,这似乎是其自然扩展。这导致了所谓的广义引导设置,最小差异推理似乎取代了最大似然。 1概率度量之间的动机和上下文差异在统计和数据科学中广泛使用,以便在各种模型,参数或半参数或什至在非参数设置中执行推理。相应的方法扩展了一定的“距离”框架的可能性范式并插入推理,该框架在模型下或在Mildspecifica-tion下提供了方便的描述。此外,他们为大量竞争方法铺平了道路,这些方法可以在效率和鲁棒性之间进行权衡。已经提出了许多这种分歧的家庭,其中一些是源于经典统计数据(例如卡方),而另一些则起源于其他领域,例如信息理论。一些差异的措施涉及相应概率度量的规律性,而其他差异措施似乎仅限于有限或可计数空间的措施,至少在将它们用作推论工具时,此后在模型的元素必须面对数据集时。在许多情况下,在特定情况下选择特定差异措施是任意的,尽管该推论的结论可能相应地有所不同,最重要的是在错误的指定下;但是,当针对鲁棒性时,对这种方法的需求很明显。
This paper is an attempt to set a justification for making use of some dicrepancy indexes, starting from the classical Maximum Likelihood definition, and adapting the corresponding basic principle of inference to situations where minimization of those indexes between a model and some extension of the empirical measure of the data appears as its natural extension. This leads to the so called generalized bootstrap setting for which minimum divergence inference seems to replace Maximum Likelihood one. 1 Motivation and context Divergences between probability measures are widely used in Statistics and Data Science in order to perform inference under models of various kinds, paramet-ric or semi parametric, or even in non parametric settings. The corresponding methods extend the likelihood paradigm and insert inference in some minimum "distance" framing, which provides a convenient description for the properties of the resulting estimators and tests, under the model or under misspecifica-tion. Furthermore they pave the way to a large number of competitive methods , which allows for trade-off between efficiency and robustness, among others. Many families of such divergences have been proposed, some of them stemming from classical statistics (such as the Chi-square), while others have their origin in other fields such as Information theory. Some measures of discrepancy involve regularity of the corresponding probability measures while others seem to be restricted to measures on finite or countable spaces, at least when using them as inferential tools, henceforth in situations when the elements of a model have to be confronted with a dataset. The choice of a specific discrepancy measure in specific context is somehow arbitrary in many cases, although the resulting conclusion of the inference might differ accordingly, above all under misspecification; however the need for such approaches is clear when aiming at robustness.