Anderson-Darling test
You don't need to be Editor-In-Chief to add or edit content to WikiDoc. You can begin to add to or edit text on this WikiDoc page by clicking on the edit button at the top of this page. Next enter or edit the information that you would like to appear here. Once you are done editing, scroll down and click the Save page button at the bottom of the page.
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Phone:617-632-7753
Please Take Over This Page and Apply to be Editor-In-Chief for this topic: There can be one or more than one Editor-In-Chief. You may also apply to be an Associate Editor-In-Chief of one of the subtopics below. Please mail us [2] to indicate your interest in serving either as an Editor-In-Chief of the entire topic or as an Associate Editor-In-Chief for a subtopic. Please be sure to attach your CV and or biographical sketch.
Overview
The Anderson-Darling test, named after Theodore Wilbur Anderson, Jr. (1918–?) and Donald A. Darling (1915–?), who invented it in 1952[1], is one of the most powerful statistics for detecting most departures from normality. It may be used with small sample sizes n ≤ 25. Very large sample sizes may reject the assumption of normality with only slight imperfections, but industrial data with sample sizes of 200 and more have passed the Anderson-Darling test. [citation needed]
The Anderson-Darling test assesses whether a sample comes from a specified distribution. The formula for the test statistic A to assess if data
(note that the data must be put in order) comes from a distribution with cumulative distribution function (CDF) F is
- A2 = − N − S
where
The test statistic can then be compared against the critical values of the theoretical distribution (dependent on which F is used) to determine the P-value.
The Anderson-Darling test for normality is a distance or empirical distribution function (EDF) test. It is based upon the concept that when given a hypothesized underlying distribution, the data can be transformed to a uniform distribution. The transformed sample data can be then tested for uniformity with a distance test (Shapiro 1980).
In comparisons of power, Stephens (1974) found A2 to be one of the best EDF statistics for detecting most departures from normality.[2] The only statistic close was the W2 (Cramér von-Mises test) statistic.
Procedure
(If testing for normal distribution of the variable X)
1) The data of the variable X that should be tested is sorted from low to high.
2) The mean,
, and standard deviation, s, are calculated from the sample of X.
3) The values of X are standardized as follows:
4) With the standard normal CDF Φ, A2 is calculated using:
5) A2 * , an approximate adjustment for sample size, is calculated using:
6) If A2 * exceeds 0.752 then the hypothesis of normality is rejected for a 5% level test.
Note:
1. If s = 0 or any Pi = (0 or 1) then A2 cannot be calculated and is undefined.
2. Above, it was assumed that the variable Xi was being tested for normal distribution. Any other theoretical distribution can be assumed by using its CDF. Each theoretical distribution has its own critical values, and some examples are: lognormal, exponential, Weibull, extreme value type I and logistic distribution.
3. Null hypothesis follows the true distribution (in this case, N(0, 1)).
See also
External links
References
- ↑ Anderson, T. W.; Darling, D. A. (1952). "Asymptotic theory of certain "goodness-of-fit" criteria based on stochastic processes". Annals of Mathematical Statistics 23: 193-212.
- ↑ Stephens, M. A. (1974). "EDF Statistics for Goodness of Fit and Some Comparisons". Journal of the American Statistical Association 69: 730-737.
Acknowledgement and Attribution Regarding Sources of Content
Some of the initial content on this page may be incorporated in part from copyleft sources in the public domain including wikis such as Wikipedia and AskDrWiki. Drug information for patients came from the The National Library of Medicine. Infectious disease information may have come from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Differential Diagnoses are drawn from clinicians as well as an amalgamation of 3 sources: 1.The Disease Database; 2. Kahan, Scott, Smith, Ellen G. In A Page: Signs and Symptoms. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2004:3; 3. Sailer, Christian, Wasner, Susanne. Differential Diagnosis Pocket. Hermosa Beach, CA: Borm Bruckmeir Publishing LLC, 2002:7 .

