| 
Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес
оригинального документа
: http://www.adass.org/adass/proceedings/adass94/kearnsk.html  
 Дата изменения: Sat Nov 4 01:46:25 2000 Дата индексирования: Tue Oct 2 02:11:26 2012 Кодировка: Поисковые слова: http www.astronomy.ru forum index.php topic 4644.0.html  | 
 
 
K. Kearns, F. Primini, and D. Alexander
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, 
60 Garden St., 
Cambridge, MA 02138
 fitting technique, 
useful for
fitting models to binned data with few counts per bin. We demonstrate
through numerical simulations that model parameters estimated with our
technique are essentially bias-free, even when the average number of
counts per bin is 
1. This is in contrast to the results from
traditional 
 techniques, which exhibit significant biases in
such cases (see, for example, Nousek & Shue 1989; Cash 1979).
Moreover, our technique can explicitly handle bins with 0 counts,
obviating the need to ignore such bins or rebin the data. We conclude
with a discussion of the problem of estimating goodness-of-fit in the
limit of few counts using our modified 
 statistic.
When fitting models to data with few counts, two of the most common
methods used are the standard 
 method and the C statistic.  Use
of the 
 method requires that one avoid bins with 0 counts by
either ignoring them or rebinning, and produces significantly biased
results for data with few counts.  The C-statistic gives unbiased results
but is difficult to interpret in terms of goodness-of-fit.
Neither approach is
ideal, though each is useful in some cases.  The Iterative Weighting
Technique which we investigate here both addresses the
deficiencies inherent in using the standard method for data with few
counts, and provides a goodness-of-fit parameter which is
indistinguishable from the standard 
 parameter for many datasets.
Iterative Weighting (IW) is an example of the class of weighted
least-squares estimators described by Wheaton et al. (1994), in
which 
 is expressed as a weighted sum of squared deviations,

where 
 are the observed counts in bin i, 
 are
the counts predicted by the model M with parameters 
,
and the weights 
 are the inverses of the true variances
. As Wheaton et al. (1994) point out, the
approximation 
 leads to significant biases in the
best-fit parameters, due to the strong anti-correlation between 
and 
. Similar
biases are encountered if the approximation 
 is
used (Nousek & Shue 1989).
The IW technique avoids such biases by estimating 
 through
successive iterations, where for each iteration, j,
, and the best-fit
parameters 
 are determined by
minimization of

For the first iteration, all weights are set to 1.
In our sample, we find that the minimum 
 values 
and 
best-fit parameters converge after about 6 iterations.
To demonstrate the IW technique, we repeat the simple numerical experiment of Nousek & Shue (1989). For a range of total counts, N, from 25 to 1000, we generate an ideal power-law spectrum such that:

for 
 and 
For each ideal spectrum, we simulate 1000 sample spectra {n
}, where
{n
} are random deviates drawn from Poisson distributions with means
= 
. We then determine best-fit model parameters
 and 
 for each simulated spectrum, using IW 
and Powell's method for function minimization (Press 1988).   For
each N, we then compute 
the average 
 and 
; compile the
distributions of minimum 
 for comparison with the theoretical
distribution; and compute the percentage of simulations for which the
 and 
 contours include 
 and 
,
for comparison with the expected percentages.
  
Table: Comparison of three fitting techniques.
we compare the biases (as measured by the ratios of average best-fit
parameter values to true values) in 1000 IW runs with those found for
traditional 
 and the C statistic by Nousek & Shue in 250 runs.
We find that the IW biases are comparable to those encountered using
the C statistic for all N. These results are displayed in
Figure 
.
In Figure 
 we compare both differential and cumulative 
theoretical 
 distributions with our observed 
distributions. We apply a KS-test to the cumulative distributions and
find that at N=25 the match is poor, but by
N=100 the two distributions are in good agreement.
The percentage of simulations for which the
 contours include 
 and 
,
for 
 values appropriate to various joint two-parameter
confidence levels, is shown in
table 
.
  
Table: Estimating Confidence Limits: Percentage of Best Fits Within Various
 Boundaries, from a total of 1000 spectral fits.
For most N, the measured and expected confidence levels are in good agreement.
  
Figure: Bias in best-fit parameters for three fitting techniques.
  Original PostScript figure (13 kB)
  
Figure: Comparison of theoretical 
 distribution with observed
distribution for IW by KS-test, with overlaid histograms.
  Original PostScript figures 
(56 kB), 
(56 kB)
We find that unbiased parameter estimates by 
 minimization are
possible for binned data with few or no counts in some bins, provided the
 calculation is modified slightly.  Except for
very small N, this modified 
 statistic is distributed
according to the theoretical 
 distribution.  Goodness-of-fit can
therefore be assessed using traditional techniques.  Further,
this 
 statistic can be used to estimate
confidence levels from standard 
 boundaries.
This work is partially supported by NASA contract NAS5-30934.
Nousek, J. A., & Shue, D. R. 1989, ApJ, 342, 1207
Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., & Flannery, B. P. 1986, Numerical Recipes (New York, Cambridge University Press)
Wheaton, W. A. et al. 1995, ApJ, submitted