How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Validity of identity-corrected random-permutation Monte Carlo p-values
Statement
In a setup as in Measurable finite-group permutation setups, suppose every null law is invariant. Fix and use either design of Identity-corrected random-permutation Monte Carlo p-value. With replacement, let be the unordered transformation multiset, with multiplicity, represented by , where the are independent uniform draws from . Without replacement, let , where is a uniformly selected -subset of and . In both cases define counting multiplicity in the with-replacement case.
Let be the finite set of possible transformation multisets for the with-replacement design or subsets for the without-replacement design, and let be the induced design law. On use the joint experiment whose law at is for in the product sigma-algebra. Then Thus is a valid p-value on the joint experiment and its cutoff has null rejection probability at most . When a nonempty disjoint alternative is specified, the cutoff test has size at most and is level . The proof treats the uniform-subset design separately; the without-replacement formula is not inferred from the with-replacement case. If without replacement, and the formula reduces to the full-orbit value of Exact finite-group permutation p-values and tests.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A finite group acting measurably, a measurable score, invariant null laws, an integer , and either independent uniform draws with replacement or a uniform -subset of nonidentity transformations without replacement. Prove superuniformity including ties and the test conclusion.
Measurable finite-group permutation setups: each null law is invariant under every group element and the score is measurable.
Identity-corrected random-permutation Monte Carlo p-value: the with-replacement design uses the distinguished identity plus IID uniform group draws; the without-replacement design adjoins the identity to a uniform subset of .
Independent random elements: the simulation design and its auxiliary randomization are independent of the observed data; in the with-replacement proof the selected position is uniform and independent of the list, while in the without-replacement proof the selected element is uniform conditional on the sampled set.
The uniform probability space on a nonempty finite set: a uniform law on a nonempty finite set gives each element the same probability.
Tied upper ranks on a finite multiset: the inclusive upper rank of a uniformly selected index from any finite real-valued list is superuniform, with ties counted by index.
Exact finite-group permutation p-values and tests: using all of gives the full-orbit inclusive upper rank p-value under the same invariant-null premise.
Valid p-values: a valid p-value is superuniform under each law in the nonempty null.
Valid p-values yield level tests for nonempty disjoint alternatives: thresholding a valid p-value gives a level test.
Randomized procedures as probability kernels, Randomized tests, and Every measurable rejection function defines a randomized test: a measurable rejection function in defines a binary randomized test.
Test size and power: size is the supremum over the null of the test's rejection probability.
Statistical experiments: a statistical experiment is a measurable data space together with one probability measure on it for each parameter.
Proof
For the selected design, is finite. Every has measurable sections . The displayed finite sum is nonnegative with total mass one. For disjoint , each section is the disjoint union of , so countable additivity of and the finite sum over give countable additivity of . Thus [F11] makes this a joint statistical experiment. For measurable real functions , is measurable because . Therefore each section is measurable. Since is finite, each sublevel set of is a finite union of measurable sections , so is measurable on the joint space. The distinguished identity contributes one tied-or-higher value, so ; at , and .
First use the with-replacement design. Represent by its generating positions to choose an independent uniform position , and write for the entry at that position. The unordered multiset has the same law as : if is the identity position it is unchanged; if , right multiplication by makes position equal to , makes the former identity position uniform on , and leaves the other draws conditionally independent uniform on . Thus, after order is ignored, there is again one distinguished identity and IID uniform group elements.
Now use the without-replacement design and put . The possible sets are the -element subsets of containing , all equally likely. Given , choose uniformly from its elements. The map is a bijection from pairs with , , onto pairs with , , : its inverse is . Each fixed in the image has exactly possible , so has the same uniform-subset law as .
Since is independent of and each fixed preserves its null law, conditioning on gives . By step 1.2, has the same design law as , so and have the same joint law. Now fix and a labelled presentation of a with-replacement multiset before drawing . The value counts, with multiplicity, the entries for which , because . As is uniform over the positions, this is the inclusive upper rank of a uniform position in the score multiset . By [F5] this rank is superuniform conditional on ; averaging and using the joint-law equality transfers the bound to . This proves the with-replacement case, with ties and duplicate transformations counted by position.
The auxiliary pair is independent of . For each fixed value of that pair, invariance gives ; step 1.3 gives the same design law as . Hence and have the same joint law. To bound the transformed p-value, fix before drawing . Conditional on , is uniform over its elements, and is the inclusive upper rank of that selected position in , since . By [F5] this rank is superuniform conditional on ; averaging and using the joint-law equality transfers the bound to . This is a separate uniform-subset proof.
By [F7], the superuniform bounds in steps 2.1 and 2.2 make a valid p-value on the joint experiment. For each observed , the probability over the finite simulation design of rejection is , a finite average of measurable indicators by step 1.1. By [F9], defines a binary randomized test on the original experiment. Its null rejection probability is , the rejection probability of the joint-experiment threshold test covered by [F8]. Thus, when a nonempty disjoint alternative is specified, [F10] gives size at most and hence level . When without replacement, the only possible set is , so the formula agrees with [F6]. No choice axiom is used.
Depends on
- Measurable finite-group permutation setups
- Full-orbit and tie-randomized permutation p-values
- Statistical experiments
- Identity-corrected random-permutation Monte Carlo p-value
- Exact finite-group permutation p-values and tests
- Independent random elements
- The uniform probability space on a nonempty finite set
- Tied upper ranks on a finite multiset
- Valid p-values
- Randomized procedures as probability kernels
- Randomized tests
- Every measurable rejection function defines a randomized test
- Test size and power
- Valid p-values yield level tests for nonempty disjoint alternatives
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
43 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Jesse Hemerik and Jelle Goeman, Exact Testing with Random Permutations, Definition 2 and Theorem 2 with proof (standard reference, not scraped)
- Eugene Katsevich, STAT 9610 Lecture Notes, §3.2.4.2, equations (3.18)–(3.20) (standard reference, not scraped)