Empirical likelihood for the difference of two survival functions under right censorship
For right censored data, empirical likelihood method is used to construct the confidence band for the difference of two survival functions. The empirical log-likelihood ratio is derived and its asymptotic distribution is obtained. Simulation studies show that the likelihood confidence band based on the empirical likelihood method performed better than that of the Hall-Wellner type band in terms of the coverage accuracy, especially for small size of observation.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 76 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (January)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- McKeague, Ian W. & Zhao, Yichuan, 2002. "Simultaneous confidence bands for ratios of survival functions via empirical likelihood," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 405-415, December.
- Einmahl, J.H.J. & McKeague, I.W., 1999. "Confidence tubes for multiple quantile plots via empirical likelihood," Other publications TiSEM b64493f8-1c01-40fd-b16d-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Li, Gang, 1995. "On nonparametric likelihood ratio estimation of survival probabilities for censored data," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 95-104, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:76:y:2006:i:2:p:169-181. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.