ArticleBiometrika2025
Aggregating dependent signals with heavy-tailed combination tests.
Article in Biometrika, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- distQTL: distribution quantitative trait loci identification by population-scale single-cell data.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- distQTL: Distribution Quantitative Trait Loci Identification by Population-Scale Single-Cell Data.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Single-Cell Multiomic Analysis of Circadian Rhythmicity in Mouse Liver.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Combining exchangeableProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Combining dependent [Formula: see text]-values poses a long-standing challenge in statistical inference, particularly when aggregating findings from multiple methods to enhance signal detection. Recently, [Formula: see text]-value combination tests based on regularly-varying-tailed distributions, such as the Cauchy combination test and harmonic mean [Formula: see text]-value, have attracted attention for their robustness to unknown dependence. This paper provides a theoretical and empirical evaluation of these methods under an asymptotic regime where the number of [Formula: see text]-values is fixed and the global test significance level approaches zero. We examine two types of dependence among the [Formula: see text]-values. First, when [Formula: see text]-values are pairwise asymptotically independent, such as with bivariate normal test statistics with no perfect correlation, we prove that these combination tests are asymptotically valid. However, they become equivalent to the Bonferroni test as the significance level tends to zero for both one-sided and two-sided [Formula: see text]-values. Empirical investigations suggest that this equivalence can emerge at moderately small significance levels. Second, under pairwise quasi-asymptotic dependence, such as with bivariate [Formula: see text]-distributed test statistics, our simulations suggest that these combination tests can remain valid and exhibit notable power gains over the Bonferroni test, even as the significance level diminishes. These findings highlight the potential advantages of these combination tests in scenarios where [Formula: see text]-values exhibit substantial dependence. Our simulations also examine how test performance depends on the support and tail heaviness of the underlying distributions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.