E. Musta
Please Note
9 records found
1
We study the asymptotic behavior of the marginal expected shortfall when the two random variables are asymptotic independent but positively associated, which is modeled by the so-called tail dependent coefficient. We construct an estimator of the marginal expected shortfall, which is shown to be asymptotically normal. The finite sample performance of the estimator is investigated in a small simulation study. The method is also applied to estimate the expected amount of rainfall at a weather station given that there is a once every 100 years rainfall at another weather station nearby.
a monotone function on a compact interval and a smooth estimator
of this function. Our main result is a central limit theorem for the Lp-error
of smooth isotonic estimators obtained by smoothing a Grenander-type
estimator or isotonizing the ordinary kernel estimator. As a preliminary result
we establish a similar result for ordinary kernel estimators. Our results
are obtained in a general setting, which includes estimation of a monotone
density, regression function and hazard rate. We also perform a simulation
study for testing monotonicity on the basis of the L2-distance between the
kernel estimator and the smoothed Grenander-type estimator. ...
a monotone function on a compact interval and a smooth estimator
of this function. Our main result is a central limit theorem for the Lp-error
of smooth isotonic estimators obtained by smoothing a Grenander-type
estimator or isotonizing the ordinary kernel estimator. As a preliminary result
we establish a similar result for ordinary kernel estimators. Our results
are obtained in a general setting, which includes estimation of a monotone
density, regression function and hazard rate. We also perform a simulation
study for testing monotonicity on the basis of the L2-distance between the
kernel estimator and the smoothed Grenander-type estimator.
We consider Grenander-type estimators for a monotone function (Formula presented.), obtained as the slope of a concave (convex) estimate of the primitive of λ. Our main result is a central limit theorem for the Hellinger loss, which applies to estimation of a probability density, a regression function or a failure rate. In the case of density estimation, the limiting variance of the Hellinger loss turns out to be independent of λ.
...
We consider the smoothed maximum likelihood estimator and the smoothed Grenander-type estimator for a monotone baseline hazard rate 0 in the Cox model. We analyze their asymptotic behaviour and show that they are asymptotically normal at rate nm=.2mC1/, when 0 is m 2 times continuously differentiable, and that both estimators are asymptotically equivalent. Finally, we present numerical results on pointwise confidence intervals that illustrate the comparable behaviour of the two methods.
We consider the process Λ̂n−Λn, where Λn is a cadlag step estimator for the primitive Λ of a nonincreasing function λ on [0,1], and Λ̂n is the least concave majorant of Λn. We extend the results in Kulikov and Lopuhaä (2006, 2008) to the general setting considered in Durot (2007). Under this setting we prove that a suitably scaled version of Λ̂n−Λn converges in distribution to the corresponding process for two-sided Brownian motion with parabolic drift and we establish a central limit theorem for the Lp-distance between Λ̂n and Λn.
We consider two isotonic smooth estimators for a monotone baseline hazard in the Cox model, a maximum smooth likelihood estimator and a Grenander-type estimator based on the smoothed Breslow estimator for the cumulative baseline hazard. We show that they are both asymptotically normal at rate nm∕(2m+1), where m≥2 denotes the level of smoothness considered, and we relate their limit behavior to kernel smoothed isotonic estimators studied in Lopuhaä and Musta (2016). It turns out that the Grenander-type estimator is asymptotically equivalent to the kernel smoothed isotonic estimators, while the maximum smoothed likelihood estimator exhibits the same asymptotic variance but a different bias. Finally, we present numerical results on pointwise confidence intervals that illustrate the comparable behavior of the two methods.