IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v32y1997i3p249-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Model checks under random censorship

Author

Listed:
  • Nikabadze, A.
  • Stute, W.

Abstract

Let denote a parametric family of lifetime distributions on the real line. For a given sample of possibly censored data from an unknown distribution function F, we consider the Kaplan-Meier process with estimated parameters. It constitutes the basic tool for checking the hypothesis . Since for testing purposes this process is intractable in practice we propose to transform it to another one from which (asymptotically) distribution-free full model checks are readily available.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikabadze, A. & Stute, W., 1997. "Model checks under random censorship," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 249-259, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:32:y:1997:i:3:p:249-259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7152(96)00081-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. K. Auinger, 1990. "Quasi goodness of fit tests for lifetime distributions," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 97-116, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Can, S.U. & Einmahl, John & Laeven, R.J.A., 2017. "Asymptotically Distribution-Free Goodness-of-Fit Testing for Copulas," Discussion Paper 2017-052, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    2. Delgado, Miguel A. & Hidalgo, Javier & Velasco, Carlos, 2005. "Distribution free goodness-of-fit tests for linear processes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6840, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Tatiana Komarova & Javier Hidalgo, 2019. "Testing nonparametric shape restrictions," Papers 1909.01675, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    4. Zhang, Chun-Xia & Mei, Chang-Lin & Zhang, Jiang-She, 2007. "An empirical study of a test for polynomial relationships in randomly right censored regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(12), pages 6543-6556, August.
    5. Delgado, Miguel A. & Stute, Winfried, 2008. "Distribution-free specification tests of conditional models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 37-55, March.
    6. Can, S.U. & Einmahl, John & Laeven, R.J.A., 2020. "Goodness-of-fit testing for copulas: A distribution-free approach," Other publications TiSEM 211b2be9-b46e-41e2-9b95-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Li, Gang & Sun, Yanqing, 2000. "A simulation-based goodness-of-fit test for survival data," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 403-410, May.

    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. Simos Meintanis & George Iliopoulos, 2003. "Tests of fit for the Rayleigh distribution based on the empirical Laplace transform," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 55(1), pages 137-151, March.
    2. Kunnummal Muralidharan, 2014. "Inferences on inliers in Rayleigh distribution," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 72(3), pages 307-315, October.

    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:eee:stapro:v:32:y:1997:i:3:p:249-259. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.