1

Asymptotic Intermediate Efficiency of the Chi-square and Likelihood Ratio
Goodness of Fit Tests
Sherzod M. Mirakhmedov
Institute of Mathematics. Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan
100125, Tashkent, Durmon yuli st., 29
e-mail: shmirakhmedov@yahoo.com

Abstract. Asymptotic relative intermediate efficiency of the chi-square and log-likelihood ratio
goodness of fit tests is studied. Asymptotical comparison of these tests through asymptotical behavior
of the probabilities of type one errors, subject the tests have the same fixed asymptotic power is
considered also. It is assumed that the number of groups increases together with the number of
observations.
Keywords. Asymptotic efficiency, asymptotic slope, chi-square statistic, log-likelihood ratio statistic,
multinomial distribution.
MSC (2000): 60F10, 62G10, 62G20

1. Introduction
The goodness-of-fit tests from groped data constitute a classical problem in statistical inference.
Here the original problem is to test whether a sample has come from a given distribution. This problem
is transformed into a problem of fit for a multinomial distribution by the method of grouping data: the
support of given distribution is divided into N mutually exclusive intervals and is observed the number
of observations, say  k , arisen in the k th interval. Test statistics in this approach are constructed
through comparison of  k with its expected number npk , k  1,..., N , where n is the sample size. Most
notable test statistics of this kind are Pearson’s chi-square (  2 ) statistic:

(m  npm )2
npm
m 1
N

 N2  

and the log-likelihood ratio (LR) statistic:
N

m

m 1

npm

 N  2m ln

,

here pm , m  1,..., N , are the probabilities of a testing hypothesis.
There is huge literature where interest and results have followed many aspects: the asymptotic
distributional and statistical properties and recommendations in applications of these statistics in the
case fixed N , the number of cells, see Gvanceladze and Chibisov (1979), Moore (1986), Read and
Cressie (1988) , Cressie and Read (1989) and references within. However the assumption k fixed is
restrictive in several contexts. Indeed: Mann and Wald (1942) have obtained the relation N

cn2/5 ,

where c  0 depends on the test size, concerning the optimal choice of the number of groups in chi-

2

square goodness of fit test; next, consider a problem of testing uniformity distribution on a fixed
interval in which the interval partitioned into subintervals of equal length, if it is desired to achieve a
specified expected frequency  (say) for each subinterval, then N subintervals are used for a sample
size of n, where N  N n is selected to make n / N n close to  . See Rempata and Wesolowski (2016)
and Pietrzak et al.( 2016) for another examples associating with “big-data” problems.
In the present paper we study asymptotic properties in testing goodness-of-fit of  N2 and  N
statistics in situation when N  N (n)   , as n   . Specifically, we consider the problem of
testing the goodness of fit of an absolutely continuous distribution F to a set of n observations
grouped into N equal probability intervals. Through a probability integral transformation the original
problem can be reduced to testing the null hypothesis of uniformity, i.e. H 0 : F ( x)  f ( x)  1 , 0  x  1.
We shall test H 0 against a family of the sequences of alternatives:
H1n : f n ( x)  1   (n)ln ( x)

where

1

 l ( x)dx  0 ,
0 n

ln

2

 1 , supn ln



(1.1)

  and  (n)  0 as n   .

Under the hypothesis H 0 the probabilities of intervals are p1  ...  pN  N 1 . Hence the chi-square
and LR statistics are special variants of the symmetric statistics:
N

S Nh   h(m ) ,

(1.2)

m 1

where h is a function defined on non-negative axis,1 ,..., N the numbers of observations in the
intervals. A test based on the statistic S Nh will be called h-test for brevity. Asymptotical properties of htests essentially depend on behavior of  (n) , hence the alternatives (1.1) need some classification. Due
to Holst (1972), Ivchenko and Medvedev (1978) and Mirakhmedov (1987) there is no power of the h-





tests for the alternatives (1.1) with  (n)  o (nn )1/4 , where n  n / N , and for the alternatives (1.1)
with  (n)  (nn )1/4 the chi-square test is asymptotically most powerful within class of h-tests
(satisfying some Lyapunov’s kind condition). The rate  (n)  (nn )1/4 keeps asymptotic power of the
h-tests bounded away from the level and 1, and hence (1.1) in this case forms a family of Pitman
alternatives. Another family of “extreme” alternatives arises when one assumes that  (n) remains
fixed, i.e. alternatives does not approach the hypothesis; this case arises in Bahadur and HodgesLehman settings. Quine and Robinson (1985) have proved that when n   the chi-square and LR
tests have the same Pitman asymptotical efficiency (AE) , but the chi-square test is inferior to the LR
test in terms of the Bahadur AE. Further, these sequences of alternatives (1.1) with  (n)  0 and

 (n)(nn )1/4   provide yet family of intermediate alternatives, we shall denote it by symbol

alt

.

According of our best knowledge there is only the paper by Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995) who

3

have considered the intermediate properties of h-tests in terms of asymptotical  - slopes, see Section
2, in testing hypothesis on the uniformity of the probabilities of a multinomial distribution. For the
sparse multinomial model, i.e. n    (0, ) and 0  c1  Npm  c2   , m  1,..., N , they have
proved that the chi-square test is optimal in term of  - slope within the class of h-tests for the
subfamily of



such that  (n)  O  (nn )1 log n 

alt

1/4

 , but for the subfamily of

alt

satisfying the

condition  (n)n1/6 log 1/3 N   the chi-square test is inferior to tests satisfying the Cramér condition,
see Appendix, condition (A.1). Note that the  N statistic satisfies the Cramér condition, whereas the
 N2 statistic does not.

Thus existing results does not cover the properties of the chi-square and LR tests for the family

alt

.

Further , because the chi-square test being more (when n is bounded away from zero and infinity) or
the same ( if n   ) AE w.r.t. LR test for the Pitman family of alternatives (closest to hypothesis and
distinguishable by the family of h-tests), and because it loses its leadership for the family of fixed
alternatives, hence very interesting problem is to find the maximum “distance” between alternatives
and the hypothesis when the chi-square test still retain “leadership”. In this work we address those
problems in terms both of  -slopes and of the traditional definition of asymptotic relative efficiency
(ARE), viz. a limiting value of the ratio of the sample sizes; for the definitions see Section 2 and
Appendix. Let



stands for the subfamily of

alt

such that  (n)  (nn2 ) ,   0 . In particularly, we

show, in terms of   slopes as well as in terms of asymptotic intermediate efficiency due to Inglot
(1999), that for the family
efficient, but for the family



with   1/ 8 the chi-square and LR tests are asymptotically same


with 0    1/ 8 the  2 test is inferior to the LR test. These complement

the results of Quine and Robinson (1985), Mirakhmedov (1987) and Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov
(1995).
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The main results are presented in Section 2; in Section
3 the proofs are given; for the reader’s convenience, the auxiliary Assertions are collected in
Appendix. In what follows c j is an universal positive constant; all asymptotic statements are
considered as n   ; 

F stands for “ r.v  has the distribution F ”; an

bn stands for an  o(bn ) .

2. The results
We still use the notation of Sections 1. Remind, the symbol

alt

stands for the family of alternatives

(1.1), where  (n)  0 and  (n)(nn )1/4   , n  n / N . It turned out that asymptotic properties of the
chi-square test are different for the following subfamilies of the family of intermediate alternatives
:

alt

4





1/6

,

o

, the subfamily such that  (n)  o n max(1, n2 )



, the subfamily such that  (n)  (nn2 ) , 1/ 8    1/ 6 ,

1/8

, the subfamily such that,  (n)  (nn2 )1/8 .

Before moving on to the specified AE results of the chi-square and LR tests we need to consider
some notation on the general h-tests. Let  n and  n stand for the size and power respectively of the htest, Pi ,  i , Vari the probability, expectation and variance counted under H i , i  0,1 ; here and
everywhere in the sequel H1 means the family of alternatives under consideration, and h is not a linear
function. We suppose that large values of S Nh rejects the hypothesis and E1S Nh  E0 S Nh .
Assuming that n    (0.1) we shall measure the performance of the h -test by the asymptotic
value of a  -slope, viz.,
en (S Nh )   log P0 S Nh  E1S Nh  .

(2.1)

Similarly, when  n    (0.1) we measure the performance of the test by the asymptotic value of a

 -slope, viz.,
en (S Nh )   log P1 S Nh  E0 S Nh  .

(2.2)

We shall focus in the sequel on the  -slope of h-tests. For a given family of alternatives the  asymptotic relative efficiency (  ARE) of one test to another, subject they have the same asymptotic
power, which is bounded away from zero and 1, is defined as the ratio of their asymptotic  -slopes.
This corresponds to a concept of comparison of two tests through comparison of asymptotic behavior
of the probabilities of the first type errors, when they have the same fixed asymptotic power; in our
opinion such concept is reasonable and corresponds to the spirit of ARE of two tests.
Let 

Poi(n ) and

  n1 cov(h( ),  ) ,  (S Nh , n )  corr  h( )   ,  2  (2n  1)  .

(2.3)

Note that  (  N2 , n )  1 and   S Nh , n   corr0 ( S Nh ,  N2 )(1  o(1)) .
Theorem 2.1. The followings are hold:
a) In the family

o

for arbitrary n , and

b) for each   (1/ 8,1/ 6] in the family

n(16 )/(14 )

N



if

n3(14 )/4(12 ) ,

(2.4)

one has

en (  N2 )
1
 (1  o(1)) ;
4
nn (n) 4

(2.5)

5

c) In the family

1/8

one has

en (  N2 )
 o(1) .
nn 4 (n)
Remark 2.1. Note that the case   1/ 6 is in a) part. For   1/ 8 the condition (2.4) implies
N  o( n ) . In particularly, if   1/ 6 then N  o(n3/8 ) , and if   1/ 8   ,   (0,1/ 24] , then

condition (2.3) implies n(124 )/2(18 )

n(324 )/2(38 ) . So N is close to

N

n for the  close to 1/8,

and when  varies in the interval (1/ 8,1/ 6] the strips (2.4) cover interval (1, o( n )) .
Theorem 2.2. Let n    (0, ] . For the subfamily of

alt

such that  (n)  o(n1/2 ) one has

en ( N ) 1 2
  ( N ,  )(1  o(1)) .
nn 4 (n) 4
Note that  ( N , n )  1  (6n )1 (1  o(1)) if n   .
Corollary 2.1. a) In the family

o

for arbitrary n one has

 ARE   N2 ,  N    2   N , n  (1  o(1)) ;
b) For each   (1/ 8,1/ 6] in the family



if the condition (2.4) is fulfilled then

 ARE   N2 ,  N   1  o(1) ;
c) In the family

1/8

if  (n)  o(n1/2 ) then

 ARE   N2 ,  N   o(1) .
Theorem 2.1 allows getting the asymptotic intermediate efficiency (AIE) due to Inglot (1999), see
Definition A3 in Appendix, of  N2 test w.r.t.  N test.
Theorem 2.3. The following assertions are holding true:
a) For the families

o



and arbitrary n one has



AIE  N2 ,  N   2   N , n  (1  o(1)) ;

b) For the family



, where each   (1/ 8,1/ 6] and N satisfy (2.4), one has
AIE (  N2 ,  N )  1 ;

c) For the family

1/8

if n   and  (n)  o(n1/2 ) then
AIE (  N2 ,  N )  0 .

Theorem 2.4. Let n    (0, ) . Then in the family

o

for arbitrary h-test satisfying the Cramer

condition (A.1), in particularly for LLR test, one has AIE   N2 , S Nh    2  S Nh ,   (1  o(1))  1 .
Note that Theorem 2.4 deal with just family

o

, because the region of the large deviation result for

the chi-square statistics is limited by Assertion A2, see Appendix.

6

Remark 2.2. Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995) have considered h-tests in the problem of
goodness of fit for a multinomial distribution M (n, p1 ,..., pN ) , namely the testing hypothesis H 0 :

pm  1/ N , m  1,..., N , against sequences of alternatives H1 : ( p1 ,..., pN )  (1/ N ,...,1/ N ) , which
approach H 0 so that  ( N )  N 1  m1 ( Npm  1)2  0 , nn  ( N )   . The above presented results
N

can be reformulated and proved (by rewriting line by line of the proofs) for this goodness of fit
problem writing  ( N ) instead of  2 (n) . Note that the case n   [0, ) is of interest for the
multinomial distributions with “small sample”, see for instance, Ivchenko and Medvedev (1978).
Remark 2.3. Using asymptotical normality result of Mirakhmedov (2007) by standard algebra it
can be shown that for Pitman alternatives the ARE of h-tests (satisfying Lyapunov kind condition, see
below Lemma 3.1) w.r.t. chi-squared test is equal to  2  S Nh , n  , see also Holst (1972) and Ivchenko
and Medvedev (1978), where such result was obtained for sparse multinomial model, i.e. when
n    (0, ) and 0  c1  Npm  c2   , under additional conditions for the function h. That is, for

family of Pitman alternatives and the families of intermediate alternatives the ARE of h-test w.r.t. chisquare test is determined by the same characteristic   S Nh , n  , the measure of correlation of the h-test
statistic S Nh and chi-square statistic.
The above presented results do a classification of the ARE of chi-squared test w.r.t. log-likelihood
test depending on the rate of closeness of the alternatives to the hypothesis. Namely:
(i)

Let n   . Then the family of alternatives (1.1) with  (n)  (nn2 )1/8 is a threshold in the
AE of the chi-square test: for the alternatives which are at the “distance”  (n)  (nn2 )1/8
from the hypothesis the ARE of  N2 test is inferior to  N test, whereas for the alternatives
which are at the “distance”  (n)  (nn2 )1/8 (which include Pitman family of alternatives
also) the  N2 and  N tests have the same AE. These complement the results of Queen and
Robinson (1985).

(ii)

Let n   , 0     . Then for the family of alternatives with  (n)  o(n1/6 ) the  N2 test
asymptotically more efficient w.r.t. all h-tests satisfying the Cramer condition (A.1), in
particularly w.r.t.  N test. This complements the results of Holst (1972) , Ivchenko and
Medvedev (1978), Mirakhmedov (1987) and Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995). However,
in this case ARE between chi-square and log-likelihood tests for the family of sequences of
alternatives which are at “distance”  (n)  n1/6 is open problem yet. This is because there is
no appropriate large deviation result for  N2 statistic in the area [ N 1/6, , o( N 1/2 )] .

7

Remark 2.4. Above considered intermediate approach based on the  -slope is somewhere between
Pitman and Bahadur approaches. Alike one can consider intermediate approach based on the  -slope,
the case intermediate between Pitman and Hodges-Lehman settings, when the performance of a h-test
based on second kind error asymptotic and is measured by the asymptotic value of en ( S Nh ) , see (2.2).
We state that under the Pitman families of alternatives and

all

the en ( S Nh ) and en ( S Nh ) are

asymptotically equivalent. In Inglot and Ledwina (2004, Remark 4) it was remarked that an approach
based on the second kind error asymptotic is completely uninformative for Cramer-von Mises test; but
it may rise a situation when under intermediate alternatives it is informative. The above statement
confirms the last sentence.
3. Proofs
We still use the notation of Sections 1 and 2. First we consider the symmetric statistics S Nh (1.2).
In addition to denotes (2.3) we set

g ( )  h( )  Eh( )   (  n ) ,  2 (h)  Var g( )  Varh( ) 1  corr 2  h( ),    ,
u

L3, N  E g ( ) /  3 (h) N , (u )   et /2 dt .
3

2



Lemma 3.1. If L3, N  0 , then for any f n 



alt

one has



Pi S Nh  u Vari S Nh  Ei S Nh  (u )  o(1) , i  0,1 ;

(3.1)

E0 S Nh  NEh( )(1  o(1)) , Var1S Nh  Var0 S Nh (1  o(1))  N 2 (h)(1  o(1)) ,

(3.2)

and

xn (h)   E1S Nh  E0 S Nh  / Var0 S Nh 
def

nn 2
 (n)  (S Nh , n ) 1  o(1)  .
2

(3.3)

Proof. From Theorem of Mirakhmedov (2007) it follows that under the hypothesis H i the statistics

S Nh has asymptotically normal distribution with expectation Ai N   m1 Ei h(m ) and variance
N

 iN2   m1Vari g ( m ) , where m
N

Poi(npim ) and i  0,1 . Hence by well-known theorem on

convergence of moments (see, for example Theorem 6.14 of Moran (1984))
Ei S Nh  AiN  o(1) and Vari S Nh   iN2 (1  o(1)) .

(3.4)

Therefore (3.1) follows. Note that in our situation the random vector of frequencies of the groups
(1 ,...,N )

M  n, pi1 ,..., piN  , where p0 m  1/ N under H 0 , and under the alternatives (1.1)

p1m  

m/ N

( m 1)/ N

(1   (n)lm ( x))dx 

1
1   (n)lmN  , m  1,..., N .
N

8

Because of this applying Taylor expansion idea in the right-hand sides of equations in (3.4) after some
computation we derive (3.2) and (3.3), see also Holst (1972), Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995).
Proof is completed.
Remark 3.1. Note that the condition L3, N  0 is fulfilled for the chi-square and LR statistics iff

nn   .
Lemma 3.2. For every distribution f n 



alt

and for arbitrary symmetric statistic



SˆNh  S Nh  E0 S Nh / Var0 S Nh such that L3, N  0 the condition (i) of Definition A.2 satisfies with

bn ( f n )  xn (h) .
Proof. Due to Lemma 3.1 we have
h
h
 SˆNh
Var0 S Nh 

 S N  E1S N
P1 
 1     P1 
  xn (h)

h
Var1S Nh 
 Var1S N
 xn (h)




Var0 S Nh 
 2   xn (h)
  1  o(1)  1  o(1) ,
h 

Var
S
1 N 

since (3.2) and the fact that xn (h)   for the family

alt

. Lemma 3.2 follows.

By (3.3) we have

 S h  NEh( )

nn 2


en ( S Nh )   log P0  N

 (n)  ( S Nh , n ) 1  o(1)  .
2
  ( h) N




(3.5)

Proof of Theorem 2.1. For the chi-square statistic h(u)  (u  n )2 / n , Eh( )  1 ,  2 (h)  2 and

 (  N2 , n )  1 , hence by (3.5)





en (  N2 )   log P0  N2  xn 2 N  N ,
where xn  nn / 2  2 (n)(1  o(1)) . Note that xn  o



N min(1, n

(3.6)



1/3

 within the family

1

. Next for

each   (1/ 8,1/ 6] the first and second relations of the condition (2.4) imply xn  o( N ) and

N 3/2 / nxn  0 respectively. Therefore the cases a) and b) follows by applying in (3.6) Assertions A2
and A4 respectively.
Proof of part c). Remark that in the family

xn  o( N ) implies



,   (0,1/ 8] , we have xn  1/ 2 n1/4 , therefore

n  o( N ) . Hence Assertion A4 can’t be used here. Instead we will prove the

following
Lemma 3.3. Let n  o( N ) . In the families



with   1/ 8 one has en (  N2 )  o(nn 4 (n)) .

9

Proof. Let  (n)  n  n  d 2 nn 2 (n)   1 . Note that E0  N2  N (1  o(1)) , Var0  N2  2 N (1  o(1))


and xN ( f )  nn 2 2 (n)d 2 1  o(1)  . Use these to get







P0  N2  E1 N2  P0  N2  E0  N2  xN ( f ) Var0  N2



N

 P0  (m  n )2  n  d 2 nn 2 (n) 1  o(1) 
 m1






N

 P0   (m  n )2  n  0 1  v(n)  P0 1  v(n)
m2






 N 1

 P0  (ˆm  n )2  n  0 P0 1  v(n) .
 m1




Here ˆm





(3.9)



Bi n  v(n),( N  1)1 . Put ˆn  (n  v(n)) / ( N  1) . It is easy to see that





v(n)) / n   N 1  d (n) N 1/2  1  o(1)  and ˆn  n 1  O  N 1  d (n) N 1/2  . We have

 N 1

 N 1

P0  (ˆm  n )2  n  0  P0  (ˆm  ˆn )2  ( N  1)n 
 m1

 m1










 N 1

 P0  (ˆm  ˆn )2  ˆn   v(n)  n 
 m1






 N 1

ˆ 2 ˆ
  (ˆm  n )  n

 P0  m1
 d (n)  o(1)   c  0 ,
2
 2(n  v(n)) / ( N  1)




(3.10)

N 1

because (n  v(n))ˆn  nn 1  o(1)    , and hence the CLT for the statistic  (ˆm  ˆn )2 is enable to
m 1

use, see Mirakhmedov (1992, Corollary 3 ).
Set g ( x, p)  x log  x / p   (1  x) log  (1  x) / (1  p)  , x  (0,1) and p  (0,1) . Let 

Bi  k , p  . Due

to Lemma 1 of Quine and Robinson (1985): for an integer kx
P   kx  0.8  2 kx(1  x) 

Note that under H 0 the r.v. 1

1/2

exp kg ( x, p) .

(3.11)

B(n, N 1 ) , therefore applying (3.11) we obtain

P0 1  v(n)





 c v(n) 1  v(n)n 1

 c  v(n) 
Hence

1/2





1/2


1  v(n)n1 
exp v(n) log(n1v(n))  n(1  n 1v(n)) log

1  N 1 




exp v(n) log(n1v(n)) .

10



log P0 1  v(n)
nn 4 (n)

c

   (n) nn
log v(n)  v(n) log(n1v(n))
v ( n)
c n
log
4
4
nn (n)
nn (n)
n

 1
1
 c 4
 3
 n (n)  (n) n
n



 n 1/3  n 1/8 
 N2 
v ( n)
log

c

log

 2 

  o(1) ,
 2 


N
N
n








n




(3.12)

since n  o( N 2 ) . Lemma 3.3 follows from (3.9), (3.10) and (3.12).
For

n  o( N ) part c) follows from Lemma 3.3. Let now N  o( n ) . Lemma 3.2 allows to

conclude that en (  N2 ) asymptotically coincides with intermediate slope, see Definition A2; the
constant c and the sequence  n are such that  n c  en (  N2 ) / nn 4 (n) / 4(1  o(1)) , since (3.3). On the
other hand, when testing uniformity against family

alt

the Neyman-Pearson (NP) test can be applied.

As it was shown by Inglot and Ledvina (1996, Sec 5) the intermediate slope of NP test has the form

n 2 (n) / 2 . Hence, if  n  1 under the family

1/8

then en (  N2 ) / en ( NP)

 2cn 2 (n)  2c(n / N 2 )1/4   , but this is impossible because the ratio en (  N2 ) / en ( NP) can’t be

greater than 1. Proof of Theorem 2.1 is completed.





Proof of Theorem 2.2 . By (3.2), (3.3) and (3.5) en ( N )   log P0  N  xn Var0  N  E0  N , where
xn  d 2 nn / 2  2 (n)  ( N , n )(1  o(1)) . Note that xn  o( N 1/2 ) iff  (n)  o(n1/2 ) . Proof of Theorem 2.2

is concluded by applying Assertions A3 and A5.
Proof of Corollary 3.1. Let c be an arbitrary constant and tnh ( f n )  nn / 2  2 (n)  (S Nh , n )  c , f n 

alt

.

The test statistic is SˆNh  ( S Nh  E0 S Nh ) / Var0 S Nh . For the power of the h-test with critical region

Sˆ

h
N



 tnh ( f n )  c

(3.13)

using Lemma 3.1 we obtain

 S h  E S h
E S h  E0 S Nh
1 N
P1 SˆNh  tnh ( f n )  c  P1  N
 tnh ( f n )  1 N
h
Var0 S Nh
 Var1S N






Var0 S Nh

c
  (c)  o(1) ,
Var1S Nh


since (3.2) and (3.3). Hence asymptotic power of this h-test is bounded away from zero and 1. The
related significance level of (3.13) is defined via



 



 n  P SˆNh  tnh ( f n )  c  P0 SˆNh  nn / 2  2 (n)  (S Nh , n )(1  o(1))   n (S Nh ) .

(3.14)

The proof of Corollary 2.1 is concluded by applying these facts for the chi-square and LR tests and
using Theorems 2.1 and 2.2.
Proof of Theorem 2.3 and 2.4. The proof is concluded by checking the conditions of Assertion A.6

ˆ , the standardized version of the chi-square and LR statistics
with Vn(2) ( f n )  ˆ N2 and Vn(1) ( f n )  
n
respectevely, which are considered as the test statistics. The condition (i) of the Definition A2 follows

11

from Lemma 3.2. Next, from large deviations results, given in Assertions A1-A5, and Theorem 2.1 it
follows that for Sˆnf statistic and its special cases ˆ N2 and ˆ n the condition (ii) of Definition A2 is
satisfied for appropriate families of alternatives. Therefore we obtain the following facts:
(a) The ˆ n is



alt

, qn(1) ,1 -regular for the n    (0, ] , where qn(1)  n1/2 and its asymptotic slope

(AS) is bn ( f n )  41 n 4 (n)  2 ( N , n ) , note that bn ( f n )  41 n 4 (n) if n   .
(b) The ˆ N2 statistic is

and







, qn(2) ,1 -regular, where



o

, qn(2)  n1/3 min(n1/6 , n1/2 ) for arbitrary n ,

, qn(2)  n1/2 for each   (1/ 8,1/ 6] and N from the strip (2.4). The AS of the chi-square

statistic is bn ( f n )  41 n 4 (n) for every f n 



. Also the ˆ N2 statistic is 

1/8

, n1/2 , n  -regular with

 n  o(1) and AS bn ( f n )   n n 4 (n) .
(c) If n    (0, ) then according to Assertion A1 the test statistic S nh satisfying the Cramer



condition (A.1) is

alt

,1,1 -regular and its asymptotic slope (AS) is [bn ( f n )]2 / 2 , where

bn ( f n )  21 n  2 (n)   S Nh , n  , f n 

Further, observe that
family

o

and



alt

alt

.

is renumerable, log  n (  N2 )  nn 4 (n) / 4(1  o(1)) and e  1 for the

,   (1/ 8,1/ 6] , whereas log  n (  N2 )  o(nn 4 (n)) and e  0 for the family

1/8

,

since (3.14) and Theorem 2.1. Due to these and above (a),(b) and (c) facts we see that all conditions of
Assertion A6 are satisfied. Theorems 2.3 and 2.4 follow.
In order to confirm the statement of Remark 3.4 we note that
h
h


nn 2
 S  E1S N

en ( S Nh )   log P  N

 (n)  ( S Nh , n ) 1  o(1)  
h
2


 Var1S N


since (3.2) and (3.3). This implies that  -slope also is determined by the large deviation probabilities
for the left tails of S Nh under alternatives

alt

. Such kind results are given in Mirakhmedov (2016) for

the  N2 and  N statistics and by Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995) for the some class of symmetric
statistics.
Appendix. We still use the notation of the previous sections.
Assertion A1. Let the function h is not linear, n    (0, ) , Npmax  c1 , for some c1  0 , and
max E exp H g (m )   c2 , for some H  0 and C2  0 , m

1 m N

Poi(npm ) .

(A.1)

Then for xn   , 0  xn  o  N 1/2  it holds






x3 
1
log P S Nh  xn VarS Nh  ES Nh   xn2  O  log xn  n  .
2
N

Assertion A1 follows from Theorem 2 of Ivchenko and Mirakhmedov (1995) and the fact that

12





1  ( xn )  ( xn 2 ) 1 exp  xn2 / 2 1  o(1)  , xn   .

(A.2)

Note that for the statistics  N Cramer condition (A.1) is satisfied but for the  N2 does not.
Assertion A2. Let pm  N 1 1   (n)dm,n  , m  1, 2,..., N , where  (n)  0 and
N

1 N 2
 d m,n  d 2   ,
N m1

 d m,n  0 ,
m 1

Then for arbitrary n and xn such that 0  xn  o





N min(1, n2 )



1/ 3

 one has



1
P  N2  xn 2 N  N   xn2  O  log xn  ,
2

Assertion A3. Let pm  N 1 1  o(1)  , m  1, 2,..., N , If n   , xn   , xn  o  N 1/6  then





1
log P  N  xn 2 N  N   xn2  O  log xn  .
2
Assertion A2 and Assertion A3 follow respectively from Corollary 2.2 and Corollary 2.3 of
Mirakhmedov (2016) and (A.2).
Assertion A4. Let N  o( n ) , Npmin  c . If xn   , xn  o( N ) and N 3/2 n1/2 xn   then

 x3
x N 3/2 
1
log P  N2  xn 2 N  N   xn2  O  n  log N  n
.
2
n 
 N





Assertion A5. Let n   and Npmin  c for some c  0 . If xn   and xn  o( N ) then

 x3
1
N 3/2 
log P  N  xn 2 N  N   xn2  O  n  log N 
.
2
n 
 N





Assertions A4 and A5 are respectively Eq. (2.17) and Eq. (2.13) of Kallenberg (1985).
The notion of Kallenberg’s intermediate efficiency, Kallenberg (1983), for the case when dealing
with nonparametric sequences of alternatives has been developed by Inglot (1999). We need a slightly
more general definition than his one. Below the notation of Inglot (1999) in the variant adapted to the
problem of testing uniformity against sequences of alternatives (1.1) are presented.
So, we consider testing the hypothesis H 0 : f ( x)  1 , 0  x  1 . In what follows symbol



denotes

the family of all sequences of alternative distributions whose densities have the form (1.1), where

ln ( x) as in (1.1), but

 (n)  0 and n (n)   ,
Definition A1. We say that a family
fn 

(A.1)

of alternatives (1.1) satisfying (A.1) is renumarable if for every

and all sequences of positive integers n j and k j , such that n j   , n j  O(k j ) the sequence

f n  f n if n  k j else f n  f n j if n  k j , j  1, 2,... also belong to

.

13


Note that the families

and

alt

are renumerable, whereas subfamilies

o

,



and

1/8

, see Section 3,

are not.
Let q  (qn ) and   ( n ) be sequences of positive numbers such that

lim qn  0 , lim nqn2   , or qn  1 for all n ,

(A.2)

lim n  0 , or  n  1 for all n.
Also let

be a subfamily of the family



(A.3)

, and Vn ( f n ) , f n 

, be a test statistic rejecting the

hypothesis for large values of Vn ( f n ) .
Definition A2. The test statistic Vn ( f n ) is called ( , q, ) -regular for testing H 0 against H1 if Vn ( f n ) is
defined for every f n 

and the following two conditions hold:
and arbitrary small   0

(i) there exists a positive function bn ( f n ) such that for every f n 

 V (f )



lim P1  n n  1     1,


 nbn ( f n )

(ii) there exists a constant c  0 such that for every sequence xn , xn  o(qn ) and  n nxn2  
lim





1
log P0 Vn ( pn )  nxn  c .
 n n xn2

The function c n bn ( f n ) is called the intermediate slope of Vn ( f n ) .
2

For two sequences of test statistics Vn(1) ( f n ) and Vn(2) ( f n ) with right critical regions let ntn(1), and





ntn(2), be corresponding critical values of the same level  , i.e. P0 Vn(i )  ntn(i,)   , and
P0 Vn(i )  d    for every d  ntn(i,) , i  1, 2 . Let Vn( j ) ( f n ) be (
( j)





( j)

, q( j ) , ( j ) ) -regular, where

, the sequences q( j )  (q jn ) ,  ( j )  ( jn ) satisfy (A.2) and (A.3) respectively, j  1, 2 . Let  n

be a sequence of levels such that
lim  n  lim( n n)1 n  0 , with  n  min(1n , 2n ) ,

(A.4)

and the power of Vn(2) ( f n ) test of the level  n is bounded away from 0 and 1:









0  liminf P1 Vn(2) ( f n )  n tn(2),n  limsup P1 Vn(2) ( f n )  n tn(2),n  1 .

(A.5)

Put





nV ( 2) ,V (1)  nV ( 2) ,V (1) (n, f n ,  n )  inf m : P1 Vm(1)k ( f n )  m  k tm(1)k ,n









 P1 Vn(2) ( f n )  n tn(2),n for all k  0 .
Definition A3. Let a family
exists the limit

satisfies (A.1) and there exists  n satisfying (A.4) and (A.5). If there

14

lim

nV ( 2) ,V (1)
n

 eV ( 2) ,V (1)  [0, ] ,

which does not depend on the particular choice of  n , then eV ( 2)V (1) is called asymptotic intermediate
efficiency of Vn(2) ( f n ) with respect to Vn(1) ( f n ) , shortly AIE Vn(2) ( f n ),Vn(1) ( f n )  .
Assertion A6. Let (i) aforementioned statistic Vn( j ) ( f n ) be (

( j)

corresponding functions bn( j ) ( f n ) and constants c ( j ) , j  1, 2 ; (ii)
sufficiently large ; (iii)

fn 

(2)

(1)

, q( j ) , ( j ) ) -regular with
(1)



(2)

and q2 n  q1n 1n , for n

be renumerable , q1n1 and  n n q1n are non-decreasing; (iv) for every

there exists the limit

lim
(v) for each f n 

(2)

c (2) 2 n bn(2) ( pn ) 
c (1) 1n bn(1) ( pn ) 

2

2

 e  [0, ] ;

there exists  n satisfying (A.4) and (A.5) and such that log  n  o(nq22n ) . Then

eV ( 2) ,V (1)  e .
The proof of Assertion A6 consists of rewriting line by line the proof of Theorem 2.7 of Inglot
(1999) with quite obvious changes, and is here omitted.

References.
1. Cressie N.A.C. and Read T.R. C. (1989). Pearson's X2 and the Log-likelihood Ratio Statistic G2 :
A Comparative Review. International Statistical Review, v.57, p.19-43.
2. Gvanceladze L.G. and Chibisov D.M. (1979). On tests of fit based on grouped data. In
Contribution to Statistics, J.Hajek Mamorial Valume. J.Jurechkova. ed. 79-89. Academia, Prague.
3. Holst L. (1972). Asymptotic normality and efficiency for certain goodness-of-fit tests. Biometrica,
59, p.137-145.
4. Inglot T. and Ledwina T.,(1996). Asymptotic optimality of data-driven Neyman’s tests for
uniformity. Ann. Statist. 24, p.1982-2019.
5. Inglot T., (1999). Generalized intermediate efficiency of goodness-of-fit tests. Math. Methods
Statist; 8, p.487-509.
6. Inglot T. and Ledwina T.,(2004). On consistent minimax distinguishability and intermediate
efficiency of Cramer-von Mises test. J. Stat. Planning Infer., 124, p. 453-474.
7. Ivchenko G.I., Medvedev Y.I.(1978). Decomposable statistics and verifying of tests. Small sample
case. Theory of Probability Appl., 23 , 796-806.
8. Ivchenko G.I., Mirakhmedov Sh.A., (1995). Large deviations and intermediate efficiency of the
decomposable statistics in multinomial scheme. Math. Methods in Statist., 4, p.294-311.

15

9. Kallenberg W.C.M.,(1983). Intermediate efficiency, theory and examples. Ann. Statist, 11, p. 170182.
10. Kallenberg W.C.M.,(1985). On moderate and large deviations in multinomial distributions. Ann.
Statist. 13, 1554-1580.
11. Mann H.B. and Wald, A. (1942). On the choice of the number of intervals in the application of the
chi-square test. Ann. Math. Statist. 13, 306-317.
12. Moore D.S (1986). Tests of chi-squared type in goodness of fit techniques. Ed. R.B. D’Agostino
and V.A. Stephens, pp 63-95. New York: Marcel Dekker.
13. Mirakhmedov Sh. A., (1987). Approximation of the distribution of multi-dimensional randomized
divisible statistics by normal distribution.(Multinomial case). Theory Probabl. Appl., 32, p.696-707.
14. Mirakhmedov Sh .A.(1992), Randomized decomposable statistics in the scheme of independent
allocating particles into boxes. Discrete Math. Appl. 2, p.91-108. DOI: 10.1515/dma.1992.2.1.91,
October 2009

15. Mirakhmedov S.M1. (2007). Asymptotic normality associated with generalized occupancy
problem. Statistics & Probability Letters, v.77, p.1549-1558
16. Mirakhmedov S.M. (2016), The Probabilities of Large Deviations for Chi-square and Log
likelihood Ratio Statistics. http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.00250.
17. Quine M.P. and Robinson J. (1985). Efficiencies of chi-square and likelihood ratio goodness-of-fit
tests, The Annals of Statistics. 13, p.727–742.
18. Pietrzak, M., Rempała, G.A., Seweryn, M., Wesołowski, J.( 2016). Limit theorems for empirical
Rйnyi entropy and divergence with applications to molecular diversity analysis. TEST 1–20.
19. Read T. R. C. and Cressie N. A. C. (1988). Goodness-of-Fit Statistics for Discrete Multivariate
Data. Springer-Verlag, New York.
20. Rempata and Wesolowski (2016). Double asymptotics for the chi-square statistic. Statis. Probabl
Letters, 119,p.317-325.

1

Mirakhmedov S.M. is former Mirakhmedov Sh.A.

