On Computing Upper Limits to Source Intensities
Vinay L. Kashyap, David A. van Dyk, Alanna Connors, Peter Freeman,, Aneta Siemiginowska, Jin Xu, Andreas Zezas

TL;DR
This paper formalizes the concept of upper limits in astrophysics detection problems using statistical power and error rates, clarifying their distinction from confidence bounds and providing a universal computation method.
Contribution
It introduces a self-consistent statistical framework for computing upper limits based on TypeII error and detection thresholds, differentiating them from confidence intervals.
Findings
Defines upper limits as detection procedure characteristics.
Provides a universal recipe for computing upper limits.
Clarifies the distinction between upper limits and confidence bounds.
Abstract
A common problem in astrophysics is determining how bright a source could be and still not be detected. Despite the simplicity with which the problem can be stated, the solution involves complex statistical issues that require careful analysis. In contrast to the confidence bound, this concept has never been formally analyzed, leading to a great variety of often ad hoc solutions. Here we formulate and describe the problem in a self-consistent manner. Detection significance is usually defined by the acceptable proportion of false positives (the TypeI error), and we invoke the complementary concept of false negatives (the TypeII error), based on the statistical power of a test, to compute an upper limit to the detectable source intensity. To determine the minimum intensity that a source must have for it to be detected, we first define a detection threshold, and then compute the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
