A Heavily Right Strategy for Statistical Inference with Dependent Studies in Any Dimension

TL;DR

This paper introduces a novel 'heavily right' strategy for statistical inference in dependent studies, improving confidence region convexity and computational efficiency, especially in high-dimensional settings.

Contribution

It proposes the Half-Cauchy combination test and Pareto-based methods, ensuring convexity and providing exact algorithms for complex dependent data analysis.

Findings

Guarantees convexity for Hotelling $T^2$ or $\\chi^{2}$ statistics

Develops efficient, exact algorithms for implementation

Enables divide-and-conquer mean estimation and confidence intervals

Abstract

We leverage recent advances in heavy-tail approximations for global hypothesis testing with dependent studies to construct approximate confidence regions without modeling or estimating their dependence structures. A non-rejection region is a confidence region but it may not be convex. Convexity is appealing because it ensures any one-dimensional linear projection of the region is a confidence interval, easy to compute and interpret. We show why convexity fails for nearly all heavy-tail combination tests proposed in recent years, including the influential Cauchy combination test. These insights motivate a \textit{heavily right} strategy: truncating the left half of the Cauchy distribution to obtain the Half-Cauchy combination test. The harmonic mean test also corresponds to a heavily right distribution with a Cauchy-like tail, namely a Pareto distribution with unit power. We prove that both approaches guarantee convexity when individual studies are summarized by Hotelling $T^2$ or $\chi^{2}$ statistics (regardless of the validity of this summary) and provide efficient, \textit{exact} algorithms for implementation. Applying these methods, we develop a divide-and-combine strategy for mean estimation in any dimension and construct simultaneous confidence intervals in a network meta-analysis for treatment effect comparisons across multiple clinical trials. We also present many open problems and conclude with epistemic reflections.