Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1911.08022

Developments in statistical inference when assessing spatiotemporal disease clustering with the tau statistic

Timothy M. Pollington·Michael J. Tildesley·T. Déirdre Hollingsworth·Lloyd A. C. Chapman
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The tau statistic $τ$ uses geolocation and, usually, symptom onset time to assess global spatiotemporal clustering from epidemiological data. We test different factors that could affect graphical hypothesis tests of clustering or bias clustering range estimates based on the statistic, by comparison with a baseline analysis of an open access measles dataset. From re-analysing this data we find that the spatial bootstrap sampling method used to construct the confidence interval for the tau estimate and confidence interval (CI) type can bias clustering range estimates. We suggest that the bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) CI is essential for asymmetric sample bootstrap distributions of tau estimates. We also find evidence against no spatiotemporal clustering, $p$-value $\in$ [0,0.014] (global envelope test). We develop a tau-specific modification of the Loh & Stein spatial bootstrap sampling method, which gives more precise bootstrapped tau estimates and a 20% higher estimated clustering endpoint than previously published (36.0m; 95% BCa CI (14.9, 46.6), vs 30m) and an equivalent increase in the clustering area of elevated disease odds by 44%. What appears a modest radial bias in the range estimate is more than doubled on the areal scale, which public health resources are proportional to. This difference could have important consequences for control. Correct practice of hypothesis testing of no clustering and clustering range estimation of the tau statistic are illustrated in the Graphical abstract. We advocate proper implementation of this useful statistic, ultimately to reduce inaccuracies in control policy decisions made during disease clustering analysis.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Timothy M. Pollington, Michael J. Tildesley, T. Déirdre Hollingsworth, Lloyd A. C. Chapman. 2020-03-09. Developments in statistical inference when assessing spatiotemporal disease clustering with the tau statistic. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spasta.2020.100438

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↗