Robustness of marginal likelihood based tests for random regression coefficients

2015

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3233/mas-150325
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Over the last few decades there has been a growing literature on diagnostic tests of regression disturbances. Tests that have been constructed based on marginal likelihood methods have been found to do well when the disturbances are normally distributed. This paper investigates the small-sample siz e and power properties of marginal likelihood based tests when testing for random regression coefficients in the presence of first-order autoregressive disturbances. We find test sizes are less robust to non-normality as the sample size increases and the relative power performance of the various tests hardly changes as non-normality is introduced. Consequently marginal likelihood score based tests typically have the best power properties with a particular approximate point optimal invariant test providing some exceptions.