IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ijbist/v13y2017i1p6n14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Big Data, Small Sample: Edgeworth Expansions Provide a Cautionary Tale

Author

Listed:
  • Gerlovina Inna

    (Division of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley, 101 Haviland Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

  • van der Laan Mark J.

    (University of California, Berkeley 101 Haviland Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

  • Hubbard Alan

    (Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA)

Abstract

Multiple comparisons and small sample size, common characteristics of many types of “Big Data” including those that are produced by genomic studies, present specific challenges that affect reliability of inference. Use of multiple testing procedures necessitates calculation of very small tail probabilities of a test statistic distribution. Results based on large deviation theory provide a formal condition that is necessary to guarantee error rate control given practical sample sizes, linking the number of tests and the sample size; this condition, however, is rarely satisfied. Using methods that are based on Edgeworth expansions (relying especially on the work of Peter Hall), we explore the impact of departures of sampling distributions from typical assumptions on actual error rates. Our investigation illustrates how far the actual error rates can be from the declared nominal levels, suggesting potentially wide-spread problems with error rate control, specifically excessive false positives. This is an important factor that contributes to “reproducibility crisis”. We also review some other commonly used methods (such as permutation and methods based on finite sampling inequalities) in their application to multiple testing/small sample data. We point out that Edgeworth expansions, providing higher order approximations to the sampling distribution, offer a promising direction for data analysis that could improve reliability of studies relying on large numbers of comparisons with modest sample sizes.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerlovina Inna & van der Laan Mark J. & Hubbard Alan, 2017. "Big Data, Small Sample: Edgeworth Expansions Provide a Cautionary Tale," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 1-6, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:13:y:2017:i:1:p:6:n:14
    DOI: 10.1515/ijb-2017-0012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijb-2017-0012
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ijb-2017-0012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rosenblum Michael A & van der Laan Mark J., 2009. "Confidence Intervals for the Population Mean Tailored to Small Sample Sizes, with Applications to Survey Sampling," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-46, January.
    2. Lazer, David & Ryan Kennedy & Gary King & Alessandro Vespignani, 2014. "Google Flu Trends Still Appears Sick: An Evaluation of the 2013?2014 Flu Season," Working Paper 155056, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefan Pichler & Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2015. "The Pros and Cons of Sick Pay Schemes: Testing for Contagious Presenteeism and Shirking Behavior," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1509, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Pichler, Stefan & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2019. "Reprint of: The pros and cons of sick pay schemes: Testing for contagious presenteeism and noncontagious absenteeism behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 86-104.
    3. Pichler, Stefan & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2017. "The pros and cons of sick pay schemes: Testing for contagious presenteeism and noncontagious absenteeism behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 14-33.
    4. Savage David A., 2016. "Surviving the Storm: Behavioural Economics in the Conflict Environment," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(2), pages 105-129, April.
    5. Michael Spagat, 2010. "Estimating the Human Costs of War: The Sample Survey Approach," HiCN Research Design Notes 14, Households in Conflict Network.
    6. Yulin Hswen & Elad Yom-Tov, 2021. "Analysis of a Vaping-Associated Lung Injury Outbreak through Participatory Surveillance and Archival Internet Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-17, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ijbist:v:13:y:2017:i:1:p:6:n:14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.