Analytic Permutation Testing for Functional Data ANOVA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analysis of variance is a cornerstone of statistical hypothesis testing. When data lies beyond the assumption of univariate normality, nonparametric methods including rank based statistics and permutation tests are enlisted. The permutation test is a versatile exact nonparametric significance test that requires drastically fewer assumptions than similar parametric tests. The main downfall of the permutation test is high computational cost making this approach laborious for comparing multiple samples of complex data types and completely infeasible in any application requiring speedy results such as high throughput streaming data. We rectify this problem through application of concentration inequalities and thus propose a computation free permutation test—that is, a permutation-less permutation test. This general framework is applied to multivariate and matrix-valued, but with a special emphasis on functional data. We improve these concentration bounds via a novel incomplete beta transform. Our theory is extended from two-sample to k-sample testing through the use of weakly dependent Rademacher chaoses and modified decoupling inequalities. Our methodology is tested on classic functional datasets including the Berkeley growth curves and the phoneme dataset. We further analyze a novel dataset of 12 spoken vowel sounds that was collected to illustrate to power of the analytic permutation test. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.146 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".