likelihood ratio testing under non-identifiability: theory and biomedical applications
DESCRIPTION
Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications. Kung-Yee Liang and Chongzhi Di Department Biostatistics Johns Hopkins University July 9-10, 2009 National Taiwan University. Outline. Challenges associated with likelihood inference - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability:
Theory and Biomedical Applications
Kung-Yee Liang and Chongzhi DiDepartment Biostatistics
Johns Hopkins University
July 9-10, 2009National Taiwan University
![Page 2: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline• Challenges associated with likelihood inference• Nuisance parameters absent under null hypothesis
– Some biomedical examples
– Statistical implications
• Class I: alternative representation of LR test statistic– Implications
• Class II– Asymptotic null distribution of LR test statistic
– Some alternatives
• A genetic linkage example• Discussion
![Page 3: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Likelihood InferenceLikelihood inference has been successful in a
variety of scientific fields• LOD score method for genetic linkage
– BRCA1 for breast cancerHall et al. (1990) Science
• Poisson regression for environmental health– Fine air particle (PM10) for increased mortality in total
cause and in cardiovascular and respiratory causes Samet et al. (2000) NEJM
• ML image reconstruction estimate for nuclear medicine– Diagnoses for myocardial infarction and cancers
![Page 4: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Challenges for Likelihood Inference
• In the absence of sufficient substantive knowledge, likelihood function maybe difficult to fully specify– Genetic linkage for complex traits– Genome-wide association with thousands of SNPs– Gene expression data for tumor cells
• There is computational issue as well for high-dimensional observations– High throughput data
![Page 5: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Challenges for Likelihood Inference (con’t)
• Impacts of nuisance parameters– Inconsistency of MLE with many nuisance
parameters (Neyman-Scott problem)– Different scientific conclusions with different
nuisance parameter values– Ill-behaved likelihood function
• Asymptotic approximation not ready
![Page 6: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Parametric Linkage Analyses - 123 multiplex families - 4 models
0
1
2
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
genetic distance in CentiMorgans
HL
OD
Dominant1_HLOD recessive1_HLOD dominant2_HLOD recessive2_HLOD
![Page 7: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
-12
0-1
10
-10
0-9
0-8
0-7
0Beta-Binomial Log-Likelihood
Lo
g li
kelih
oo
d
L0.80.8L0.60.8
0.056
L0.80.1L0.60.1
336.9
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.8
![Page 8: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Challenges for Likelihood Inference (con’t)
• There are situations where some of the “regularity” conditions may be violated– Boundary issue (variance components, genetic
linkage, etc.)Self & Liang (1987) JASA
– Discrete parameter spaceLindsay & Roeder (1986) JASA
– Singular information matrix (admixture model)Rotnitzky et al (2000) Bernoulli
![Page 9: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Nuisance Parameters Absent under Null
Ex. I.1 (Polar coordinate for bivariate normal)
Under H0: δ = 0, γ is absent
Davies (1977) BiometrikaAndrews and Ploberger (1994) Econometrica
10
01,
sin
cos...
2
1 ~
BVNY
Y dii
i
i
![Page 10: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. I.2 (Sterotype model for ordinal categorical response)
For Y = 2, .., C,
log Pr(Y = j)/Pr(Y = 1) = αj + βjtx, j = 2,..,C
= αj + φj βtx
0 = φ1 ≤ φ2 … ≤ φC = 1
Under H0: β = 0, φj ’s are absent
Anderson (1984) JRSSB
![Page 11: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. I.3 (Variance component models)In certain situations, the covariance matrix of
continuous and multivariate observations could be expressed as
δM(γ) + λ1M1 + … +λqMq
A hypothesis of interest is H0: δ = 0 (γ is absent)
Ritz and Skovgaard (2005) Biometrika
![Page 12: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. I.4 (Gene-gene interactions)
Consider the following logistic regression model:logit Pr(Y = 1|S1, S2) = α + Σk δkS1k + Σj λkS2j
+ γ Σk Σj δk λj S1k S2j
To test genetic association between gene one (S1) by taking into account potential interaction with gene two (S2), the hypothesis of interest is
H0: δ1 = … = δK = 0 (γ is absent)
Chatterjee et al. (2005) American Journal of Human Genetics
![Page 13: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. II.1 (Admixture models)
f(y; δ, γ) = δ p(y; γ) + (1 – δ) p(y; γ0)
δ: proportion of linked families
γ: recombination fraction (γ0= 0.5)
Smith (1963) Annals of Human Genetics
The null hypothesis of no genetic linkage can be cast asH0: δ = 0 (γ is absent) or H0: γ = γ0 (δ is absent)
![Page 14: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. II.2 (Change point)
logit Pr(Y = 1|x) = β0 + βx + δ(x – γ)+
(x – γ)+ = x – γ if x – γ > 0 and 0 if otherwise
• Alcohol consumption protective for MI when consuming less than γ, but harmful when exceeding the threshold
Pastor et al. (1998) American Journal of Epidemiology
Hypothesis of no threshold existing can be cast asH0: δ = 0 (γ is absent) or H0: γ = ∞ (δ is absent)
![Page 15: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Examples (con’t)
Ex. II.3 (Non-linear alternative)
logit Pr(Y = 1|x) = β0 + βx + δh(x; γ)
e.g., h(x; γ) = exp(xγ) – 1
• The effect of alcohol consumption on risk, through log odds, of MI is non-linear if γ ≠ 0
The hypothesis of linearity relationship with a specific non-linear alternative can be cast asH0: δ = 0 (γ is absent) or H0: γ = 0 (δ is absent)
Gallant (1977) JASA
![Page 16: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Characteristics of ExamplesMajority of examples can be characterized as
f(y, x; δhy,x(γ, β), β)
Class I Class II
H0: δ = 0 H0: δ = 0 or γ = γ0 ( hy,x(γ0, β) = 0 )
![Page 17: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Figure: expected log likelihood function for three cases
![Page 18: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Class I: Asymptotic
For H0: δ = 0,
1. LRT = 2{logL( ) – logL(0, •)}
= supγ 2{logL( , γ) – logL(0, •)}
= supγ LRT(γ)
2. LRT(γ) = S(γ)t I-1(γ)S(γ) + op(1) = W2(γ) + op(1),
where S(γ) = ∂logL(δ, γ)/∂δ|δ=0, I(γ) = var{S(γ)}
W(γ) = I-1/2(γ) S(γ)
and W(γ) is a Gaussian process in γ with mean 0, variance 1 and autocorrelation ρ(γ1, γ2) = cov{W(γ1), W(γ2)}
ˆ,ˆ
![Page 19: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Class I: Asymptotic (con’t)
• Results were derived previously by Davies (1977, Biometrika)
• No analytical form available in general
• Approximation, simulation or resampling methods Kim and Siegmund (1989) Biometrika
Zhu and Zhang (2006) JRSSB
Q.: Can simplification be taken place for
• Asymptotic null distribution?
• Approximating the p-value?
![Page 20: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Class I: Principal Component Representation
Principal component decomposition
• K could be finite or ∞• {ξ1, …,ξK} are independent r.v.’s• ξk ~ N(0, λk), k = 1, .., K• ρ(γ, γ) = Σk λk ωk(γ)2 = 1
)()(),(,)()( 21
1211
k
K
kkk
K
kkkW
![Page 21: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Class I: Principal Component Representation (con’t)
W2(γ) = {Σk ξk ωk(γ)}2
≤ {Σk ξk2/λk} {Σk λk ωk(γ)2} = {Σk ξk
2/λk}
Consequently, one has
supγ W2(γ) = supγ {Σk ξk ωk(γ)}2 ≤ {Σk ξk2/λk} ~
• The asymptotic distribution of LRT under Ho is bounded by
2K
2K
![Page 22: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Class I: Simplification
• Simplify to if K < ∞ and for almost every
(ξ1, …, ξK), there exists γ such that
λ1ω1(γ)/ξ1 = ….. = λKωK(γ)/ξK Ex. I.1. (Polar coordinate for bivariate normal)
For any , there exists γ ε [0, π) such that
• LRT ~ instead of
H0: δ = 0 ↔ H0: μ1 = μ2
2K
21
22
)()sincos()(
)cos(),(),sincos()(2
22
12
212
2121212/1
YYnYYnW
YYnW
221 ),( RYY
sin/cos/ 21 YY
![Page 23: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Class I: Simplification (con’t)
• Simplify to if S(γ) = h(γ) g(Y)– ρ(γ1, γ2) = 1
Ex.: Modified admixture models
γ p(y; δ) + (1 – γ) p(y; δ0), γ ε [a, 1] with a > 0 fixed
H0: δ = δ0 (γ is absent) and the score function for δ at δ0 is
S(γ) = γ ∂logp(y; δ0)/∂δ• Known as restricted LRT for testing H0: δ = δ0
• Has been used in genetic linkage studiesLamdeni and Pons (1993) BiometricsShoukri and Lathrop (1993) Biometrics
21
![Page 24: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Class I: Approximation for P-values
When simplification fails: Step 1: Calculate W(γ) and ρ(γ1, γ2)
Step 2: Estimate eigenvalues {λ1, …, λK} and eigenfunctions {ω1, …, ωK}, where K is chosen so that first K components explain more than 95% variation
Step 3: Choose a set of dense grid {γ1, …, γM} and for i = 1, …, N, repeat the following steps:– Simulate ξik ~ N(0, λk) for k = 1, …, K
– Calculate Wi(γm) = {Σk ξik ωk(γm)}2 for each m
– Find the maximum of {Wi(γ1), …, Wi(γM)}, Ri say
{R1, …, RN} approximates the null distribution of LRT
![Page 25: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Class II: Some New Results
• Consider the class of familyf(y, x; δhy,x(γ, β), β),
where hy,x(γ0, β) = 0 for all y and xH0: δ = 0 or γ = γ0
Tasks: 1. Derive asymptotic distribution of LRT under H0
2. Present alternative approaches• Illustrate through Ex. II.1 (Admixture models)
δ Binom (m, γ) + (1 – δ) Binom (m, γ0) δ ε [0, 1] and γ ε [0, 0.5], hy,x(γ, β) = p(y; γ) – p(y; γ0) – For simplicity, assuming β is absent
![Page 26: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Class II: LRT Representation
Under H0, f(y, x; δ, γ) = f(y, x; 0, • ) = f(y, x; • , γ0 ),
LRT = supδ,γ 2{logL(δ, γ) – logL(0, • )} = supδ,γ LRT(δ, γ)
= max {sup1,4 LRT(a), sup2,4 LRT(b), sup3 LRT(a, b)},
here for fixed a, b > 0 and γ0 = 0.5:
Region 1: δ ε [a, 1], γ ε [0.5 – b, 0.5]
Region 2: δ ε [0, a], γ ε [0, 0.5 – b]
Region 3: δ ε [0, a], γ ε [0.5 – b, 0.5]
Region 4: δ ε [a, 1], γ ε [0, 0.5 – b]
![Page 27: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Class II: Four Sub-Regions of Parameter Spaces
![Page 28: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Class II: Regions 1 & 4
With δ ε [a, 1], this reduces to Class I, and sup1,4 LRT(a)= supδ { + op(1)}
W1(δ) = I1-½(δ)S1(δ)
S1(δ) = ∂logL(δ, γ)/∂γ|γ = γ0, I1(δ) = var(S1(δ))
For the admixture models,
• S1(δ) = δ ∂log p(y; γ0)}/∂γ, which is proportional to δ
• is independent of δ
)(21 W
)(21 W
![Page 29: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Class II: Regions 2 & 4
With γ ε [0, γ0 – b], this reduces to Class I, and
sup2,4 LRT(b)= supγ { + op(1)}
W2(γ) = I2-½(γ)S2(γ)
S2(γ) = ∂logL(δ, γ)/∂δ|δ = 0, I2(γ) = var(S2(γ))
For the admixture models,
• S2(γ) = {p(y; γ) – p(y; γ0)}/p(y; γ0)
• W2(γ) → ∂log p(y; γ0)}/∂γ = W1 as γ → γ0 (or b → 0)
)(22 W
![Page 30: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Class II: Region 3
With δ ε [0, a], γ ε [0.5 – b, 0.5], expand at [0, 0.5]sup3 LRT(a, b) = supδ,γ { + op(1)}
W3 = I3-½S3
S3 = ∂2logp(y; 0, 0.5)/∂δ∂γ, I3 = var(S3)
For the admixture models,
• S3 = ∂log p(y; γ0)}/∂γ and W3 = W1
23W
![Page 31: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Class II: Asymptotic Distribution of LRT
Combining three regions and let a, b → 0,LRT = max {sup1,4 LRT(a), sup2,4 LRT(b), sup3 LRT(a,b)}
= max { , sup [W2(γ)]2, }
→ sup {W2(γ)}2 ,
where • The asymptotic null distribution of LRT is supremum of
squared Gaussian process w.r.t. γ• Simplification (null distribution and approximation to p-
values) can be adopted from Class I
23W
3122 )(lim)5.0(0
WWWW
21W
![Page 32: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Class II: Alternatives
Question: Can one find alternatives test statistics with conventional asymptotic null distributions?
1. Restricted LRT: limit range for δ to [a, 1] with a > 0 (Region 1 and 4)
TR(a) = sup1,4 LRT(a) =
• TR(a) decreases in a
• How to choose a?– Smaller the a, the better
– Chi-square approximation maybe in doubt
21
21 ~)1( poW
![Page 33: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Class II: Alternatives (con’t)
2. Smooth version (penalized LRT)
Instead of excluding (δ, γ) values in Regions 2 & 3, they are “penalized” toward δ = 0 by considering penalized log-likelihood:
PL(δ, γ; c) = log L(δ, γ) + c g(δ),
where g(δ) ≤ 0 is a smooth penalty with , maximized at δ0 and c > 0 controlling the magnitude of penalty
• Bayesian interpretation – g(δ) could be “prior” on δ
)(lim0
g
![Page 34: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Class II: Penalized likelihood
Define the penalized LR test statistic for H0: γ = γ0
PLRT(c) = 2 {sup PL(δ, γ; c) – PL(δ0, γ0; c)}
Under H0: PLRT(c) → as n → ∞• Proof is more demanding*• Similar concerns to restricted LRT
– Decreasing in c– Chi-square approximation maybe invalid with small c– Lose power if δ is small (linked families is small in
proportion)*Different approach for mixture/admixture model was provided by
by Chen et al. (2001, 2004) and Fu et al. (2006)
21
![Page 35: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Application: Genetic Linkage for Schizophrenia
• Conducted by Ann Pulver at Hopkins
• 486 individuals from 54 multiplex families
• Interested in marker D22S942 in chromosome 22
• Schizophrenia is relatively high in prevalence with strong evidence of genetic heterogeneity
• To take into account of this phenomenon, consider
δ Binom (m, γ) + (1 – δ) Binom (m, γ0),
where δ ε [0, 1], γ ε [0, 0.5] with γ0 = 0.5
![Page 36: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Genetic Linkage Study of Schizophrenia (con’t)
With this admixture model considered,•
• LRT = 6.86, p-value = 0.007• PLRT with
– PLRT(3.0) = 5.36, p-value = 0.010– PLRT(0.5) = 5.49, p-value = 0.009– PLRT(0.01) = 6.84, p-value = 0.004
• Which p-value do we trust better?
06.0ˆ,4.0ˆ
)1,loglim(log)( 00
g
![Page 37: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Figure: asymptotic vs empirical distribution of the LRT for genetic linkage example
![Page 38: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Discussion
• Issue considered, namely, nuisance parameters absent under null, is common in practice
• Examples can be classified into Class I and II– Class I: H0 can only be specified through δ (= 0)– Class II: H0 can specified either in δ (= 0) or γ (= γ0)
• For Class I, asymptotic distribution of LRT is well known, and through principal component representation– Deriving sufficient conditions for simple null
distribution– Proposing a means to approximate p-values
![Page 39: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Discussion (con’t)
• For Class II, less well developed– Deriving asymptotic null distribution of LRT
• Through this derivation, we observe– Connection with Class I– Connection with RLRT and PLRT
• Proof on asymptotic of PLRT non-trivial• Shedding light on why penalty applied to δ not to γ?• Pointing out some peculiar features and shortcoming of
these two approaches
• A genetic linkage example on schizophrenia was presented for illustration
![Page 40: Likelihood Ratio Testing under Non-identifiability: Theory and Biomedical Applications](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56813056550346895d960cdc/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Discussion (con’t)
Some future work:
• Constructing confidence intervals/regions
• Generalizing to partial/conditional likelihood– Cox PH model with change point (nuisance function)
• Extending to estimating function approach in the absence of likelihood function to work with– Linkage study of IBD sharing for affected sibpairsE(S(t)) = 1 + (1 - 2θt,γ)2 E(S(γ)) = 1 + (1 - 2θt,γ)2 δ
θt,γ = (1 – exp(–0.02|t – γ|)/2