Problem in the paper of van Zwet

  • Thread starter victoriaabc
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Paper
In summary, the conversation is about a person seeking help with understanding a paper on contiguity and Hellinger distance. They have questions about the proof of asymptotic normality and are looking for someone familiar with the paper to help them. They also ask for examples of conditions (3.4)-(3.6) in the paper's normality theorem. This person then shares scanned pages of the paper and asks for further assistance.
  • #1
victoriaabc
2
0
Hi all,

Please help! I am reading the paper "A note on contiguity and Hellinger distance" by J. Oosterhoff and W.R. van Zwet. I have tons of questions. The following is just one of them.

Question 1: in their paper, when they prove the asymptotic normality they claim that according to an equivalent form of the normal convergence theorem (from Loeve's book) they can obtain that conditions (3.2) and (3.3) are equivalent to (3.8)-(3.10). Is there anyone know how they got there?

I am sorry that I am unable to type the formula down, there are too many notations. If anyone is familiar with this paper, could you please kindly help me out? Thank you very much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Why don't you scan the pages and post them as a .gif or .jpeg
 
  • #3
WWGD said:
Why don't you scan the pages and post them as a .gif or .jpeg
Hi WWGD,

Thank you for your suggestion. Attached are the pages. I highlighted the part that I have problems. Besides my previous question, I am also wondering if there is any example satisfying those conditions (3.4)-(3.6) in their normality theorem? Anyone can give me a hint?

Thank you very much for all your help.
 

Attachments

  • Capture1.JPG
    Capture1.JPG
    39.5 KB · Views: 406
  • Capture2.JPG
    Capture2.JPG
    39 KB · Views: 374
  • Capture3.JPG
    Capture3.JPG
    46.7 KB · Views: 376
  • Capture4.JPG
    Capture4.JPG
    33.5 KB · Views: 411

What is the problem in the paper of van Zwet?

The problem in the paper of van Zwet is that it contains statistical errors and incorrect calculations, leading to unreliable results and conclusions.

How were the errors in the paper of van Zwet discovered?

The errors in the paper of van Zwet were discovered through a thorough peer review process and subsequent replication studies.

What are the implications of these errors in the paper of van Zwet?

The errors in the paper of van Zwet can have significant impacts on the validity of the research and may lead to incorrect conclusions being drawn.

Has the author of the paper of van Zwet addressed these errors?

Yes, the author has acknowledged the errors and has issued a correction and retraction statement. They have also taken steps to prevent similar errors in future publications.

What can be done to prevent similar errors in scientific papers?

To prevent similar errors, it is important for researchers to thoroughly review their work and have it peer reviewed before publication. Additionally, journals should have stringent review processes in place to catch any errors before publishing.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
933
Replies
3
Views
890
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
824
  • Topology and Analysis
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Atomic and Condensed Matter
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
6
Views
972
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top