Further results on controlling the false discovery proportion

The probability of false discovery proportion (FDP) exceeding $\gamma\in[0,1)$, defined as $\gamma$-FDP, has received much attention as a measure of false discoveries in multiple testing. Although this measure has received acceptance due to its relevance under dependency, not much progress has been made yet advancing its theory under such dependency in a nonasymptotic setting, which motivates our research in this article. We provide a larger class of procedures containing the stepup analog of, and hence more powerful than, the stepdown procedure in Lehmann and Romano [Ann. Statist. 33 (2005) 1138-1154] controlling the $\gamma$-FDP under similar positive dependence condition assumed in that paper. We offer better alternatives of the stepdown and stepup procedures in Romano and Shaikh [IMS Lecture Notes Monogr. Ser. 49 (2006a) 33-50, Ann. Statist. 34 (2006b) 1850-1873] using pairwise joint distributions of the null $p$-values. We generalize the notion of $\gamma$-FDP making it appropriate in situations where one is willing to tolerate a few false rejections or, due to high dependency, some false rejections are inevitable, and provide methods that control this generalized $\gamma$-FDP in two different scenarios: (i) only the marginal $p$-values are available and (ii) the marginal $p$-values as well as the common pairwise joint distributions of the null $p$-values are available, and assuming both positive dependence and arbitrary dependence conditions on the $p$-values in each scenario. Our theoretical findings are being supported through numerical studies.

[1]  S. Karlin,et al.  Classes of orderings of measures and related correlation inequalities. I. Multivariate totally positive distributions , 1980 .

[2]  Moshe Shaked,et al.  A Concept of Negative Dependence Using Stochastic Ordering. , 1985 .

[3]  R. Simes,et al.  An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance , 1986 .

[4]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[5]  S. Sarkar,et al.  The Simes Method for Multiple Hypothesis Testing with Positively Dependent Test Statistics , 1997 .

[6]  S. Sarkar Some probability inequalities for ordered $\rm MTP\sb 2$ random variables: a proof of the Simes conjecture , 1998 .

[7]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  THE CONTROL OF THE FALSE DISCOVERY RATE IN MULTIPLE TESTING UNDER DEPENDENCY , 2001 .

[8]  S. Sarkar Some Results on False Discovery Rate in Stepwise multiple testing procedures , 2002 .

[9]  Michael Wolf,et al.  Centre De Referència En Economia Analítica Barcelona Economics Working Paper Series Working Paper Nº 17 Stewise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping Stepwise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping , 2022 .

[10]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  Generalizations of the familywise error rate , 2005, math/0507420.

[11]  M. J. van der Laan,et al.  Augmentation Procedures for Control of the Generalized Family-Wise Error Rate and Tail Probabilities for the Proportion of False Positives , 2004, Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology.

[12]  Sandrine Dudoit,et al.  Multiple Testing. Part I. Single-Step Procedures for Control of General Type I Error Rates , 2004, Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology.

[13]  R. Simon,et al.  Controlling the number of false discoveries: application to high-dimensional genomic data , 2004 .

[14]  L. Wasserman,et al.  A stochastic process approach to false discovery control , 2004, math/0406519.

[15]  B. Efron Correlation and Large-Scale Simultaneous Significance Testing , 2007 .

[16]  A. Owen Variance of the number of false discoveries , 2005 .

[17]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  Stepup procedures for control of generalizations of the familywise error rate , 2006, math/0611266.

[18]  Azeem M. Shaikh,et al.  On stepdown control of the false discovery proportion , 2006 .

[19]  Kyung In Kim,et al.  Effects of dependence in high-dimensional multiple testing problems , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[20]  S. Dudoit,et al.  Multiple Testing Procedures with Applications to Genomics , 2007 .

[21]  S. Sarkar STEPUP PROCEDURES CONTROLLING GENERALIZED FWER AND GENERALIZED FDR , 2007, 0803.2934.

[22]  Joseph P. Romano,et al.  A Generalized Sidak-Holm Procedure and Control of Generalized Error Rates under Independence , 2007, Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology.

[23]  A Note on Controlling the Number of False Positives , 2008, Biometrics.

[24]  Wenge Guo,et al.  On Stepwise Control of the Generalized Familywise Error Rate , 2008 .

[25]  Sanat K. Sarkar,et al.  Generalizing Simes' test and Hochberg's stepup procedure , 2008, 0803.1961.

[26]  S. Sarkar On Methods Controlling the False Discovery Rate 1 , 2009 .

[27]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  An adaptive step-down procedure with proven FDR control under independence , 2009, 0903.5373.

[28]  PROCEDURES CONTROLLING THE k-FDR USING BIVARIATE DISTRIBUTIONS OF THE NULL p-VALUES , 2010 .

[29]  Xihong Lin,et al.  The effect of correlation in false discovery rate estimation. , 2011, Biometrika.

[30]  Etienne Roquain,et al.  Exact calculations for false discovery proportion with application to least favorable configurations , 2010, 1002.2845.

[31]  Isaac Dialsingh,et al.  Large-scale inference: empirical Bayes methods for estimation, testing, and prediction , 2012 .