IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v21y2001i4p613-624.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Likelihood Contour Method for the Calculation of Asymptotic Upper Confidence Limits on the Risk Function for Quantitative Responses

Author

Listed:
  • Senin Banga
  • Ganapati P. Patil
  • Charles Taillie

Abstract

This article develops a computationally and analytically convenient form of the profile likelihood method for obtaining one‐sided confidence limits on scalar‐valued functions ϕ = ϕ(ψ) of the parameters ψ in a multiparameter statistical model. We refer to this formulation as the likelihood contour method (LCM). In general, the LCM procedure requires iterative solution of a system of nonlinear equations, and good starting values are critical because the equations have at least two solutions corresponding to the upper and lower confidence limits. We replace the LCM equations by the lowest order terms in their asymptotic expansions. The resulting equations can be solved explicitly and have exactly two solutions that are used as starting values for obtaining the respective confidence limits from the LCM equations. This article also addresses the problem of obtaining upper confidence limits for the risk function in a dose‐response model in which responses are normally distributed. Because of normality, considerable analytic simplification is possible and solution of the LCM equations reduces to an easy one‐dimensional root‐finding problem. Simulation is used to study the small‐sample coverage of the resulting confidence limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Senin Banga & Ganapati P. Patil & Charles Taillie, 2001. "Likelihood Contour Method for the Calculation of Asymptotic Upper Confidence Limits on the Risk Function for Quantitative Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(4), pages 613-624, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:21:y:2001:i:4:p:613-624
    DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.214139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.214139
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0272-4332.214139?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mirjam Moerbeek & Aldert H. Piersma & Wout Slob, 2004. "A Comparison of Three Methods for Calculating Confidence Intervals for the Benchmark Dose," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 31-40, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:21:y:2001:i:4:p:613-624. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.