Undergrad Nonparametric Hypothesis Tests

  • Thread starter Thread starter Conservation
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    statistic t-test
Click For 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
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.
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K