Towards "simultaneous selective inference": post-hoc bounds on the false discovery proportion
share
Some pitfalls of the false discovery rate (FDR) as an error criterion for multiple testing of n hypotheses include (a) committing to an error level q in advance limits its use in exploratory data analysis, and (b) controlling the false discovery proportion (FDP) on average provides no guarantee on its variability. We take a step towards overcoming these barriers using a new perspective we call "simultaneous selective inference." Many FDR procedures (such as Benjamini-Hochberg) can be viewed as carving out a path of potential rejection sets ∅ = R_0 ⊆ R_1 ⊆...⊆ R_n ⊆ [n], assigning some algorithm-dependent estimate FDP( R_k) to each one. Then, they choose k^* = {k: FDP( R_k) ≤ q}. We prove that for all these algorithms, given independent null p-values and a confidence level α, either the same FDP or a minor variant thereof bounds the unknown FDP to within a small explicit (algorithm-dependent) constant factor c_alg(α), uniformly across the entire path, with probability 1-α. Our bounds open up a middle ground between fully simultaneous inference (guarantees for all 2^n possible rejection sets), and fully selective inference (guarantees only for R_k^*). They allow the scientist to spot one or more suitable rejection sets (Select Post-hoc On the algorithm's Trajectory), by picking data-dependent sizes or error-levels, after examining the entire path of FDP( R_k) and the uniform upper band on FDP. The price for the additional flexibility of spotting is small, for example the multiplier for BH corresponding to 95
READ FULL TEXT
