Abstract:Recent likelihood theory produces $p$-values that have remarkable accuracy and wide applicability. The calculations use familiar tools such as maximum likelihood values (MLEs), observed information and parameter rescaling. The usual evaluation of such $p$-values is by simulations, and such simulations do verify that the global distribution of the $p$-values is uniform(0, 1), to high accuracy in repeated sampling. The derivation of the $p$-values, however, asserts a stronger statement, that they have a uniform(0, 1) distribution conditionally, given identified precision information provided by the data. We take a simple regression example that involves exact precision information and use large sample techniques to extract highly accurate information as to the statistical position of the data point with respect to the parameter: specifically, we examine various $p$-values and Bayesian posterior survivor $s$-values for validity. With observed data we numerically evaluate the various $p$-values and $s$-values, and we also record the related general formulas. We then assess the numerical values for accuracy using Markov chain Monte Carlo (McMC) methods. We also propose some third-order likelihood-based procedures for obtaining means and variances of Bayesian posterior distributions, again followed by McMC assessment. Finally we propose some adaptive McMC methods to improve the simulation acceptance rates. All these methods are based on asymptotic analysis that derives from the effect of additional data. And the methods use simple calculations based on familiar maximizing values and related informations. The example illustrates the general formulas and the ease of calculations, while the McMC assessments demonstrate the numerical validity of the $p$-values as percentage position of a data point. The example, however, is very simple and transparent, and thus gives little indication that in a wide generality of models the formulas do accurately separate information for almost any parameter of interest, and then do give accurate $p$-value determinations from that information. As illustration an enigmatic problem in the literature is discussed and simulations are recorded; various examples in the literature are cited.

A Note on Bayesian, Likelihood, and Sampling Distribution Inferences

A NOTE ON A SIMPLE PROBLEM IN INFERENCE

On Using Bayesian Methods to Address Small Sample Problems

Higher Accuracy for Bayesian and Frequentist Inference: Large Sample Theory for Small Sample Likelihood

Bayesian inference: More than Bayes's theorem

Sampling-Based Approaches to Calculating Marginal Densities

Binned Likelihood including Monte Carlo Statistical Uncertainty in Bayesian Inference

Bayesian questions with frequentist answers

Fully Bayesian estimation under informative sampling

Bayesian Hypothesis Tests Using Nonparametric Statistics

Bayesianly Justifiable and Relevant Frequency Calculations for the Applied Statistician

Bayesian Nonparametric Weighted Sampling Inference

Some Case Studies Using Bayesian Statistical Models

Finite sample inference for empirical Bayesian methods

An effective likelihood-free approximate computing method with statistical inferential guarantees

On the use of marginal posteriors in marginal likelihood estimation via importance-sampling

Bayesian Models and Methods in Public Policy and Government Settings

Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications

Estimating the Sampling Distribution of Posterior Decision Summaries in Bayesian Clinical Trials

Bayesian predictive inference when integrating a non-probability sample and a probability sample