Assessing significance in a Markov chain without mixing

Significance Markov chains are simple mathematical objects that can be used to generate random samples from a probability space by taking a random walk on elements of the space. Unfortunately, in applications, it is often unknown how long a chain must be run to generate good samples, and in practice, the time required is often simply too long. This difficulty can preclude the possibility of using Markov chains to make rigorous statistical claims in many cases. We develop a rigorous statistical test for Markov chains which can avoid this problem, and apply it to the problem of detecting bias in Congressional districting. We present a statistical test to detect that a presented state of a reversible Markov chain was not chosen from a stationary distribution. In particular, given a value function for the states of the Markov chain, we would like to show rigorously that the presented state is an outlier with respect to the values, by establishing a p value under the null hypothesis that it was chosen from a stationary distribution of the chain. A simple heuristic used in practice is to sample ranks of states from long random trajectories on the Markov chain and compare these with the rank of the presented state; if the presented state is a 0.1% outlier compared with the sampled ranks (its rank is in the bottom 0.1% of sampled ranks), then this observation should correspond to a p value of 0.001. This significance is not rigorous, however, without good bounds on the mixing time of the Markov chain. Our test is the following: Given the presented state in the Markov chain, take a random walk from the presented state for any number of steps. We prove that observing that the presented state is an ε-outlier on the walk is significant at p=2ε under the null hypothesis that the state was chosen from a stationary distribution. We assume nothing about the Markov chain beyond reversibility and show that significance at p≈ε is best possible in general. We illustrate the use of our test with a potential application to the rigorous detection of gerrymandering in Congressional districting.

[1]  L. Tippett,et al.  Applied Statistics. A Journal of the Royal Statistical Society , 1952 .

[2]  R. Cox,et al.  Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B , 1972 .

[3]  Cheng Blanco,et al.  Social Science Computer Review , 1987 .

[4]  Wang,et al.  Nonuniversal critical dynamics in Monte Carlo simulations. , 1987, Physical review letters.

[5]  David J. Aldous,et al.  Lower bounds for covering times for reversible Markov chains and random walks on graphs , 1989 .

[6]  D. Rubin,et al.  Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences , 1992 .

[7]  Gary L. Miller,et al.  Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing , 1996, STOC 1996.

[8]  David Bruce Wilson,et al.  Exact sampling with coupled Markov chains and applications to statistical mechanics , 1996, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[9]  James Allen Fill,et al.  An interruptible algorithm for perfect sampling via Markov chains , 1997, STOC '97.

[10]  David Wilson,et al.  Coupling from the past: A user's guide , 1997, Microsurveys in Discrete Probability.

[11]  Mark Jerrum,et al.  The Swendsen-Wang process does not always mix rapidly , 1997, STOC '97.

[12]  The Effects of Spatial Population Distributions and Political Districting on Minority Representation , 1999 .

[13]  M. Huber Perfect sampling using bounding chains , 2004, math/0405284.

[14]  A. Frieze,et al.  Mixing properties of the Swendsen-Wang process on classes of graphs , 1999, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[15]  C. Cirincione,et al.  Assessing South Carolina's 1990s congressional districting , 2000 .

[16]  Federico Etro,et al.  Political geography , 2006 .

[17]  P. S. Dwyer Annals of Applied Probability , 2006 .

[18]  D. Rubin,et al.  A Single Series from the Gibbs Sampler Provides a False Sense of Security * , 2008 .

[19]  Elizabeth L. Wilmer,et al.  Markov Chains and Mixing Times , 2008 .

[20]  Christian Borgs,et al.  Tight bounds for mixing of the Swendsen–Wang algorithm at the Potts transition point , 2010, ArXiv.

[21]  José M. Bernardo,et al.  Bayesian Statistics , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[22]  W. Marsden I and J , 2012 .

[23]  Jonathan Rodden,et al.  Unintentional Gerrymandering: Political Geography and Electoral Bias in Legislatures , 2013 .

[24]  Alan Frieze,et al.  Random Structures and Algorithms , 2014 .

[25]  Kosuke Imai,et al.  A New Automated Redistricting Simulator Using Markov Chain , 2014 .

[26]  Introduction to Random Graphs: Random Graphs , 2015 .

[27]  David Miller,et al.  Impartial Redistricting: A Markov Chain Approach , 2015, ArXiv.

[28]  Measures of Partisan Bias for Legislating Fair Elections , 2015 .

[29]  Measures of Partisan Bias for Legislating Fair Elections , 2015, 1505.06749.

[30]  Samuel S.-H. Wang Three Tests for Practical Evaluation of Partisan Gerrymandering , 2015 .

[31]  Robin E. Best,et al.  Unfair Partisan Gerrymanders in Politics and Law: A Diagnostic Applied to Six Cases , 2015 .

[32]  A. Frieze,et al.  Introduction to Random Graphs , 2016 .