I Nonparametric Hypothesis Tests

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Conservation
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    statistic t-test
AI Thread Summary
In scenarios where two sample distributions are known to differ, non-parametric alternatives to the two-sample t-test include the Mann-Whitney U test and permutation tests. While the Mann-Whitney test measures shifts and assumes similar distributions, the permutation test is more flexible and relies on minimal assumptions about the data. The Two-Sample Fisher-Pitman Permutation Test is a specific method being considered, although there is some debate regarding whether permutation tests assume equal variances. Some sources suggest that the Fisher-Spearman permutation test is sensitive to variance differences, while others indicate that permutation tests do not require equal variances. Overall, permutation tests appear to be a suitable choice for comparing means in this context.
Conservation
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Nonparametric alternatives to unpaired t-tests given that the sample distributions are different
Hello everyone,

Say you have two sample distributions that are known to be two different distributions (one randomly drawn from a Poisson distribution, other randomly drawn from an uniform distribution). Given that you know the distributions are not going to be normal, a two-sample t-test would not be appropriate here. What are some non-parametric alternatives for comparing sample means in a scenario like this? I was thinking Mann-Whitney U test, but the Mann-Whitney test assumes that the two distributions are the same and measures shift. In this case, we would know that the two distributions are different.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
@Ygggdrasil Thank you; permutation test seems to be what I'm looking for. I'm probably going to use Two-Sample Fisher-Pitman Permutation Test implemented in R; however, I'm finding conflicting reports on whether permutation test assumes equality of variance when used as a test of different means. Do you know whether I can assume non-homogeneous variances for permutation tests?
 
I don't think that permutation tests assume equal variances. What sources do you have that suggest otherwise?
 
This paper (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15077763, sorry behind a paywall) seems to suggest that Fisher-Spearman permutation test is sensitive to differences in variances; however, I've also read other literature suggesting that this is not the case for permutation tests.
 
I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...
Back
Top