arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2510.03466

Making high-order asymptotics practical: correcting goodness-of-fit test for astronomical count data

Xiaoli Li·Yang Chen·Xiao-Li Meng·David van Dyk·Massimiliano Bonamente·Vinay Kashyap
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The C statistic is a widely used likelihood-ratio statistic for model fitting and goodness-of-fit assessments with Poisson data in high-energy physics and astrophysics. Although it enjoys convenient asymptotic properties, the statistic is routinely applied in cases where its nominal null distribution relies on unwarranted assumptions. Because researchers do not typically carry out robustness checks, their scientific findings are left vulnerable to misleading significance calculations. With an emphasis on low-count scenarios, we present a comprehensive study of the theoretical properties of C statistics and related goodness-of-fit algorithms. We focus on common ``plug-in'' algorithms where moments of C are obtained by assuming the true parameter equals its estimate. To correct such methods, we provide a suite of new principled user-friendly algorithms and well-calibrated p-values that are ready for immediate deployment in the (astro)physics data-analysis pipeline. Using both theoretical and numerical results, we show (a) standard $χ^2$-based goodness-of-fit assessments are invalid in low-count settings, (b) naive methods (e.g., vanilla bootstrap) result in biased null distributions, and (c) the corrected Z-test based on conditioning and high-order asymptotics gives the best precision with low computational cost. We illustrate our methods via a suite of simulations and applied astrophysical analyses. An open-source Python package is provided in a GitHub repository.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Xiaoli Li, Yang Chen, Xiao-Li Meng, David van Dyk, Massimiliano Bonamente, Vinay Kashyap. 2025-10-03. Making high-order asymptotics practical: correcting goodness-of-fit test for astronomical count data. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.03466

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME↗