Advanced search
Publication Cover
Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods Volume 53, 2024 - Issue 9
Submit an article Journal homepage
50
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Design choices in randomization tests that affect power

Abba M. Kriegera Department of Statistics, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAView further author information
,
David Azrielb Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, The Technion, Haifa, IsraelView further author information
,
Michael Sklarc Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USAView further author information
&
Adam Kapelnerd Department of Mathematics, Queens College, CUNY, New York City, New York, USACorrespondence[email protected]
View further author information
Pages 3276-3291 | Received 11 Jun 2021, Accepted 23 Nov 2022, Published online: 10 Dec 2022

References

  • Bertsimas, D., M. Johnson, and N. Kallus. 2015. The power of optimization over randomization in designing experiments involving small samples. Operations Research 63 (4):868–76. doi:10.1287/opre.2015.1361.
  • Datta, S., S. Howard, and D. Cochran. 2012. Geometry of the welch bounds. Linear Algebra and Its Applications 437 (10):2455–70. doi:10.1016/j.laa.2012.05.036.
  • Dwass, M. 1957. Modified randomization tests for nonparametric hypotheses. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 28 (1):181–7. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177707045.
  • Fisher, R. A. 1925. Statistical methods for research workers. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh Oliver & Boyd.
  • Gold, R. 1967. Optimal binary sequences for spread spectrum multiplexing (corresp). IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 13 (4):619–21. doi:10.1109/TIT.1967.1054048.
  • Hájek, J. 1960. Limiting distributions in simple random sampling from a finite population. Publications of the Mathematical Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences 5:361–74.
  • Hemerik, J., and J. Goeman. 2018. Exact testing with random permutations. Test (Madrid, Spain) 27 (4):811–25. doi:10.1007/s11749-017-0571-1.
  • Hemerik, J., and J. J. Goeman. 2021. Another look at the lady tasting tea and differences between permutation tests and randomisation tests. International Statistical Review 89 (2):367–81. doi:10.1111/insr.12431.
  • Kallus, N. 2018. Optimal a priori balance in the design of controlled experiments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 80 (1):85–112. doi:10.1111/rssb.12240.
  • Kapelner, A., A. M. Sklar, M. Shalit, and Azriel, D. 2020. Harmonizing optimized designs with classic randomization in experiments. The American Statistician 75 (2):1–12.
  • Kasami, T. 1966. Weight distribution formula for some class of cyclic codes. Coordinated Science Laboratory Report no. R-285, Coordinated Science Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL.
  • Krieger, A. M., D. Azriel, and A. Kapelner. 2019. Nearly random designs with greatly improved balance. Biometrika 106 (3):695–701. doi:10.1093/biomet/asz026.
  • Lehmann, E. L., and J. P. Romano. 2006. Testing statistical hypotheses. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media.
  • Lin, W. 2013. Agnostic notes on regression adjustments to experimental data: Reexamining freedman’s critique. The Annals of Applied Statistics 7 (1):295–318. doi:10.1214/12-AOAS583.
  • Nordin, M., and M. Schultzberg. 2020. Properties of restricted randomization with implications for experimental design. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.14888
  • Phipson, B., and G. K. Smyth. 2010. Permutation p-values should never be zero: Calculating exact p-values when permutations are randomly drawn. Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 (1). doi:10.2202/1544-6115.1585.
  • Rosenberger, W. F., and J. M. Lachin. 2016. Randomization in clinical trials: Theory and practice, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Senn, S. 2013. Seven myths of randomisation in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 32 (9):1439–50. doi:10.1002/sim.5713.
  • Student. 1938. Comparison between balanced and random arrangements of field plots. Biometrika 29 (3/4):363–78. doi:10.2307/2332011.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.