什么时候最大不变假设检验比GLRT更好?

Hyung Soo Kim, Alfred O. Hero
{"title":"什么时候最大不变假设检验比GLRT更好?","authors":"Hyung Soo Kim, Alfred O. Hero","doi":"10.1109/ACSSC.2000.910986","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been considerable interest in applying maximal invariant (MI) hypothesis testing as an alternative to the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT). This interest has been motivated by several attractive theoretical properties of MI tests including: exact robustness to variation of nuisance parameters, finite-sample min-max optimality (in some cases), and distributional robustness, i.e. insensitivity to changes in the underlying probability distribution over a particular class. Furthermore, in some important cases the M test gives a reasonable test while the GLRT has worse performance than the trivial coin dip decision rule. However, in other cases, like the deep hide target detection problem, there are regimes (SNR, number of wireless users, coherence bandwidth) for which either of the MI and the GLRT can outperform the other. We discuss conditions under which the MI tests can be expected to outperform the GLRT in the context of a radar imaging and target detection application.","PeriodicalId":10581,"journal":{"name":"Conference Record of the Thirty-Fourth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (Cat. No.00CH37154)","volume":"16 1","pages":"401-405 vol.1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When is a maximal invariant hypothesis test better than the GLRT?\",\"authors\":\"Hyung Soo Kim, Alfred O. Hero\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ACSSC.2000.910986\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There has been considerable interest in applying maximal invariant (MI) hypothesis testing as an alternative to the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT). This interest has been motivated by several attractive theoretical properties of MI tests including: exact robustness to variation of nuisance parameters, finite-sample min-max optimality (in some cases), and distributional robustness, i.e. insensitivity to changes in the underlying probability distribution over a particular class. Furthermore, in some important cases the M test gives a reasonable test while the GLRT has worse performance than the trivial coin dip decision rule. However, in other cases, like the deep hide target detection problem, there are regimes (SNR, number of wireless users, coherence bandwidth) for which either of the MI and the GLRT can outperform the other. We discuss conditions under which the MI tests can be expected to outperform the GLRT in the context of a radar imaging and target detection application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conference Record of the Thirty-Fourth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (Cat. No.00CH37154)\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"401-405 vol.1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conference Record of the Thirty-Fourth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (Cat. No.00CH37154)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ACSSC.2000.910986\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conference Record of the Thirty-Fourth Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (Cat. No.00CH37154)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ACSSC.2000.910986","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

有相当大的兴趣应用最大不变(MI)假设检验作为替代广义似然比检验(GLRT)。这种兴趣是由人工智能测试的几个有吸引力的理论特性所激发的,包括:对干扰参数变化的精确鲁棒性、有限样本最小-最大最优性(在某些情况下)和分布鲁棒性,即对特定类别的潜在概率分布的变化不敏感。此外,在一些重要的情况下,M测试给出了一个合理的测试,而GLRT的性能比平凡的硬币倾斜决策规则更差。然而,在其他情况下,比如深度隐藏目标检测问题,在某些情况下(信噪比、无线用户数量、相干带宽),MI和GLRT中的任何一个都可以优于另一个。我们讨论了在雷达成像和目标探测应用中,MI测试可以预期优于GLRT的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When is a maximal invariant hypothesis test better than the GLRT?
There has been considerable interest in applying maximal invariant (MI) hypothesis testing as an alternative to the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT). This interest has been motivated by several attractive theoretical properties of MI tests including: exact robustness to variation of nuisance parameters, finite-sample min-max optimality (in some cases), and distributional robustness, i.e. insensitivity to changes in the underlying probability distribution over a particular class. Furthermore, in some important cases the M test gives a reasonable test while the GLRT has worse performance than the trivial coin dip decision rule. However, in other cases, like the deep hide target detection problem, there are regimes (SNR, number of wireless users, coherence bandwidth) for which either of the MI and the GLRT can outperform the other. We discuss conditions under which the MI tests can be expected to outperform the GLRT in the context of a radar imaging and target detection application.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信