arXiv:1702.05910v1 [] 20 Feb 2017

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC
H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

Abstract. We determine the joint limiting distribution of adjacent spacings
around a central, intermediate, or an extreme order statistic Xk:n of a random
sample of size n from a continuous distribution F . For central and intermediate
cases, normalized spacings in the left and right neighborhoods are asymptotically i.i.d. exponential random variables. The associated independent Poisson
arrival processes are independent of Xk:n . For an extreme Xk:n , the asymptotic independence property of spacings fails for F in the domain of attraction
of Fréchet and Weibull (α 6= 1) distributions. This work also provides additional insight into the limiting distribution for the number of observations
around Xk:n for all three cases.
Keywords: Spacings; uniform distribution; central order statistics; intermediate order statistics; extremes; Poisson process.

1. Introduction
Let X1:n ≤ X2:n ≤ · · · ≤ Xn:n be order statistics of a random sample X1 , . . . , Xn
from a continuous cdf F . For 1 ≤ k ≤ n, we examine the clustering of data
around the order statistic Xk:n . This is done by an investigation into the limiting
properties of the right and left neighborhoods formed by the adjacent spacings
(Xk+1:n −Xk:n , . . . , Xk+r:n −Xk+r−1:n ) and (Xk:n −Xk−1:n , . . . , Xk−s+1:n −Xk−s:n )
for fixed r and s. We let n → ∞ and consider three scenarios: (i) Central case
where k/n → p, 0 < p < 1; (ii) Intermediate case where k, n − k → ∞ and k/n → 0
or 1; (iii) Extreme case where k or n − k is held fixed. In the first two cases we show
that, under some mild assumptions, these (r +s) spacings appropriately scaled with
a common scale parameter converge weakly to a set of i.i.d. standard exponential
random variables (rvs). In the extreme case, this conclusion holds only when F is
in the domain of attraction of the Gumbel cdf G3 , or the Weibull type cdf G2;α
with α = 1. A direct and useful consequence of such a result is that order statistics
around a selected one arrive as in a homogeneous Poisson process.
Neighborhoods around a selected order statistic have been investigated by several authors in recent years. Almost all these results, starting with Xn:n , have
concentrated on the distribution of counts around it. We refer to a few, relevant to our results, from an exhaustive list: Balakrishnan and Stepanov (2005);
Dembińska et al. (2007); Pakes and Steutel (1997); Pakes (2009); and Dembińska
and Balakrishnan (2010). These authors typically consider neighborhoods of the
form (Xk:n − d, Xk:n ) or (Xk:n , Xk:n + d) where the lengths of the intervals may or
may not depend on n; in some papers the d’s are induced by the quantile function
F −1 or are chosen to be random. While these approaches are beneficial from a
technical perspective, it is more natural and practical to consider neighborhoods
that are in the scale of the data collected. This is our motivation for considering the
1

2

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

joint distribution of adjacent spacings. Our approach allows us to characterize the
process governing the distribution of counts and provides additional insight into
the asymptotic properties of the counts of cluster sizes around a specified order
statistic.
Section 2 contains preliminaries that explore the properties of uniform and exponential order statistics; it introduces the von Mises conditions and the associated
extreme value distributions. Section 3 is concerned with the joint distribution of
a central order statistic and spacings adjacent to it on its right and left neighborhoods. The Poisson arrival process of adjacent order statistics is established
there. Assuming von Mises conditions, Section 4 reaches a similar conclusion for
the neighborhood of an intermediate order statistic. Section 5 displays the distributional structure of the extreme spacings assuming F is in the domain of attraction
of an extreme value distribution. Section 6 applies our results and describes the
limiting distribution of the counts of observations around an order statistic. Section
7 discusses further applications of our results and contains concluding remarks.
Let f (x) denote the pdf and F −1 (p), 0 ≤ p ≤ 1, be the quantile function
associated with F (x), where F −1 (p) = inf{x : F (x) ≥ p} for 0 < p ≤ 1, F −1 (0) =
sup{x : F (x) = 0}. We interchangeably use xp and F −1 (p) as the pth quantile. It is
well-known that if F is differentiable at xp with finite and positive pdf f (xp ), F −1
is differentiable at p with derivative 1/f (xp ). Standard uniform and exponential rvs
are respectively denoted by U and Z. An exponential rv with rate parameter λ will
be denoted by Exp(λ), and Poi(λ) represents a Poisson rv with mean parameter
λ. The sum of r i.i.d. standard exponentials is a Gamma rv, to be denoted as
Gam(r). A Weibull rv with shape parameter δ will be denoted by Wei(δ). Further,
a standard normal rv will be denoted by N (0, 1) and its pdf by φ(·). The Zi ’s and
Zi∗ ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. The symbol ∼ indicates asymptotic equivalence.
The rv Ui:n , 1 ≤ i ≤ n, is the ith order statistic from a random sample of size
d
n from a standard uniform population. The distributional equivalence, Xi:n =
−1
F (Ui:n ), for any collection of order statistics from an arbitrary cdf F is helpful
in our investigations.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Spacings near a Uniform Order Statistic. The key to our approach is
the following well-known exchangeable property of the uniform order statistics.
Let U0:n = 0 and Un+1:n = 1, and define the uniform spacing
(1)

∆i,n = Ui+1:n − Ui:n , 0 ≤ i ≤ n.

Then it is well known that the ∆i,n ’s are exchangeable
Pr and for any fixed r, and
for constants vi ≥ 0, i = 1, . . . r with r ≤ n, and i=1 vi ≤ 1, the joint survival
function of ∆1,n , . . . , ∆r,n (and hence any collection of r ∆i,n ’s) is given by (see,
e.g., David and Nagaraja, 2003, p. 135)
P (∆1,n > v1 , . . . , ∆r,n > vr ) = (1 −
This means
(2)

P (n∆1,n > v1 , . . . , n∆r,n > vr ) →

r
Y

i=1

r
X

vi )n−1 .

i=1

e−vi , v1 , . . . , vr > 0.

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

3

That is, n∆i,n form an i.i.d. Exp(1) sequence Zi as n → ∞. The convergence is
fast; Problem P.5.19 of Reiss (1989, p. 201) notes that there exist a constant C
such that for every positive integer n and r ≤ n,
sup |P {(n∆1,n , . . . , n∆r,n ) ∈ B} − P {(Z1 , . . . , Zr ) ∈ B}| ≤ C · (r/n),

B∈B

where B denotes the family of all Borel sets. We record the implications of (2) and
the exchangeability of the ∆i,n ’s as a lemma given below; it uses the fact that the
inter-arrival times being i.i.d. Exp(λ) rvs is a defining property of a homogeneous
Poisson process with rate λ.
Lemma 1. Let Ui:n denote the ith order statistic from a random sample of size n
from a standard uniform distribution, and assume n → ∞. Then for any k such
that n − k → ∞,
d

(n(Uk+1:n − Uk:n ), . . . n(Uk+r:n − Uk+r−1:n )) → (Z1 , . . . , Zr ),

for any fixed r, and for any k → ∞

d

(n(Uk:n − Uk−1:n ), . . . n(Uk−s+1:n − Uk−s:n )) → (Z1∗ , . . . , Zs∗ ),

for any fixed s, where the Zi ’s and Zi∗ ’s are all mutually independent Exp(1) rvs.
That is, inter-arrival times of successive order statistics in the right and left neighborhoods of k th uniform order statistic, upon scaling by n, produce asymptotically
independent homogeneous Poisson processes if n, k, and n − k approach infinity. If
k [resp. n − k] is bounded, the right [resp. left] neighborhood produces a Poisson
process in the limit.
2.2. Spacings near an Exponential Order Statistic. When F is standard
exponential it is well-known that
Zi
d Z1
+ ···+
, i = 1, . . . , n,
(3)
Xi:n =
n
n−i+1
where the Zi ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. From this representation it follows that
(n − i + 1)(Xi:n − Xi−1:n ) are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. So, if k/n → p, 0 ≤ p < 1,
n(1 − p)(Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n ), j = 1, . . . , r will be asymptotically i.i.d Exp(1) rvs.
When (n − k) is bounded, (n − k − j + 1)(Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n ), j = 1, . . . , r for
r ≤ n − k turn out to be i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. Only in this scenario, we need finite and
distinct scaling constants for the spacings to transform them into i.i.d. exponential
rvs for any n, and hence asymptotically as well.
2.3. Extremes and Von Mises Conditions. Suppose there exist sequences of
constants an and bn > 0 such that P {(Xn:n − an )/bn ≤ x} converges to a nondegenerate cdf G(x) corresponding to a rv W . Then we say F is in the domain
of maximal attraction to G and we write F ∈ D(G). Then it is known that G is
necessarily of one of the three types given below.
(
0
x ≤ 0, α > 0,
(Fréchet) G1;α (x) =
−α
exp(−x ) x > 0;
(4)

(Weibull) G2;α (x)

=

(Gumbel) G3 (x)

=

(

exp [−(−x)α ] x ≤ 0, α > 0,
1
x > 0;


exp −e−x , −∞ < x < ∞.

4

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

The following are necessary and sufficient conditions on the right tail of F in order
that F ∈ D(G). The first two are due to Gnedenko (1943) and the last one is due
to de Haan (1970).
(a) F ∈ D(G1;α ) iff for all t > 0,
lim

x→∞

1 − F (tx)
= t−α .
1 − F (x)

(b) F ∈ D(G2;α ) iff x1 (= F −1 (1)) is finite, and the following condition holds
for every t > 0:
1 − F (x1 − tx)
lim
= tα .
x→0+ 1 − F (x1 − x)
(c) F ∈ D(G3 ) iff the following hold: E(X|X > c) is finite for some c, and for
all real t,
1 − F (x + tm(x))
= e−t ,
lim
x→x1
1 − F (x)
where m(x) = E(X − x|X > x).
Our approach for the intermediate case assumes the following sufficient conditions
that are applicable to absolutely continuous cdf’s. The first two are due to von Mises
(1936), and the last one is due to Falk (1989) and is weaker than the corresponding
von Mises condition that assumes differentiability of the pdf f (see, e. g., David
and Nagaraja, 2003, p. 300).
(a) F ∈ D(G1;α ) if f (x) > 0 for all large x and for some α > 0,
(5)

(6)

xf (x)
= α.
1 − F (x)
(b) F ∈ D(G2;α ) if x1 < ∞ and for some α > 0,
lim

x→∞

(x1 − x)f (x)
= α.
1 − F (x)
(c) F ∈ D(G3 ) if f (x) > 0 for all x in (c, x1 ) and E(X|X > c) is finite for
some c, and
lim

x→x1 −

(7)

lim

x→x1 −

f (x)m(x)
= 1,
1 − F (x)

where m(x) = E(X − x|X > x).
The family of limiting distribution for normalized X1:n correspond to that of −W
where W has one of the above three types of cdfs; parallel necessary and sufficient,
and sufficient conditions exist that impose conditions on the left tail of F .
3. Spacings Around a Central Order Statistic
3.1. Joint Distribution of Spacings. For 0 < p < 1, Xk:n is a central order
statistic if nk → p. For such an Xk:n , Smirnov (1952; Theorem 3, p. 12) has shown
(as pointed out by a reviewer) that
a.s.

Xk:n → xp

(8)

if the condition F (x) = p has a unique solution xp . Since for any fixed j,
d

(9) n(Xk+j+1:n − Xk+j:n ) =

F −1 (Uk+j+1:n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n )
n(Uk+j+1:n − Uk+j:n ),
(Uk+j+1:n − Uk+j:n )

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

5

the limiting joint distribution of the spacings from an arbitrary cdf F can be linked
to that of a collection of i.i.d. standard uniform rvs provided the first factor on the
right in (9) above converges in probability to a nonzero constant.
From (8) it follows that ∆k+j,n = Uk+j+1:n − Uk+j:n (defined in (1)) almost
surely converges to 0. The first factor on the right in (9),
(10)

F −1 (Uk+j:n + ∆k+j,n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n ) a.s. 1
,
→
∆k+j,n
f (xp )

if the following condition holds:
(11)

f is positive, finite and continuous at xp .

This conclusion follows from the definition of the derivative of F −1 and its assumed
continuity at p.
Upon using (10), (9), Slutsky’s Theorem, and Lemma 1 we conclude that jointly
d

nf (xp )(Xk+j+1:n − Xk+j:n ) → Zj+1 , j = −s, . . . 0, . . . , r − 1,
where the Zj ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs if (11) holds.
We can weaken the continuity assumption for f in (11) with the following condition:
F −1 (p1 + h) − F −1 (p1 )
= 1,
(12)
lim
(p1 ,h)→(p,0+ ) F −1 (p + h) − F −1 (p)

where 0 < p < 1. This assumption is similar to (17) in Dembińska et al. (2007)
(given as (38) in Section 6 later). The condition (11) implies that (12) holds since
the latter is satisfied upon dividing the numerator and denominator by h and taking
the double limit; the converse is not true.
On the other hand, we can weaken the requirement for a finite nonzero f (xp )
by modifying a condition on F used by Chanda (1975) [see also M. Ghosh and
Sukhatme (1981)]. We assume that
|F −1 (p + h) − F −1 (p)|
= M (p, θ) ∈ (0, ∞),
h→0
|h|θ

(13)

lim

for some θ > 0. If f is indeed finite and nonzero at xp , then the above condition is
satisfied with θ = 1. Whenever f (xp ) is finite and positive or (13) holds, there is a
unique solution to F (x) = p and (8) holds.
Based on the above discussion, we can now formally state the result for the
central case.
Theorem 1. Let k/n → p ∈ (0, 1), and r and s be fixed positive integers.
(a) If condition (11) holds, or if (12) holds and f (xp ) is finite and positive,
{nf (xp )(Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n ), j = −(s − 1), . . . , 0, . . . , r}
d

→ {Zs∗ , . . . , Z1∗ , Z1 , . . . , Zr }

where the Z’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. Thus the two counting processes defined
by setting the j th event to occur respectively at times
nf (xp )

k+j−1
X
i=k

(Xi+1:n − Xi:n ) and nf (xp )

k−j
X

i=k−1

(Xi+1:n − Xi:n )

6

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

converge weakly to two independent homogeneous Poisson processes with
unit intensity.
(b) Assume (12) and (13) hold. Then,
 θ
n (Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n )/M (p, θ), j = −(s − 1), . . . , 0, . . . , r
d 
(14)
→ (Zs∗ )θ , . . . , (Z1∗ )θ , (Z1 )θ , . . . , (Zr )θ .
That is, the counting processes defined by setting the j th event of the process
to occur at times

nθ

k+j−1
X
i=k

(Xi+1:n − Xi:n )/M (p, θ) and nθ

k−j
X

i=k−1

(Xi+1:n − Xi:n )/M (p, θ)

converge to i.i.d. renewal processes with Wei(1/θ) renewal distribution.
They reduce to homogeneous Poisson processes with unit intensity only when
θ = 1 and f (xp ) is finite and positive.
Proof. To prove part (a), we need to show that (10) holds whenever (11) holds, or
if (12) holds and f (xp ) is finite and positive. Then we would use (10), (9), Slutsky’s
Theorem, and Lemma 1. We have shown earlier that (10) holds whenever (11) is
satisfied.
If (12) holds and f (xp ) is finite and positive, the left side expression in (10) can
be written as
F −1 (Uk+j:n + ∆k+j,n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n ) F −1 (p + ∆k+j,n ) − F −1 (p)
,
·
F −1 (p + ∆k+j,n ) − F −1 (p)
∆k+j,n
where the first factor converges to 1 and the second factor converges to 1/f (xp ),
both almost surely. Thus, (10) is established.
For (b), the idea is similar. We note that nθ (F −1 (Uk+j:n +∆k+j,n )−F −1 (Uk+j:n ))
can be written as
F −1 (Uk+j:n + ∆k+j,n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n )
(n∆k+j,n )θ .
∆θk+j,n
Assumption (13) coupled with (12) ensures that the first factor above converges
almost surely to M (p, θ). Since P (n∆k+j,n > w) → exp{−w} for all w > 0,
θ

d

P ((n∆k+j,n )θ > w) → exp{−w1/θ }; that is, (n∆k+j,n ) → Z θ . The claim in (14)
′
now readily follows. If θ = 1 and (13) holds, then M (p; 1) = (F −1 (xp )) = 1/f (xp )
has to be positive and finite, and the limiting arrival process would be Poisson.


Remark. The condition (13) does not imply (12); nor does it ensure that f (xp ) is
finite and positive. Consider the pdf
f (x) = (η + 1)|x|η /2,

|x| ≤ 1, η > −1.

This is a corrected version of the pdf given in Chanda (1975), and discussed in
Ghosh and Sukhatme (1981) (we thank a reviewer for noticing the error). The
associated quantile function is given by
(
−(1 − 2u)1/(η+1) ,
0 < u ≤ 21
−1
F (u) =
1
(2u − 1)1/(η+1) ,
2 ≤ u < 1.

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

7

This quantile function fails to satisfy the condition in (12) when p = 0.5 and η
is a positive even integer, but satisfies (13) with θ = 1/(η + 1). Here xp = 0,
M (p, θ) = 2θ ; f (xp ) is 0 or ∞ depending on whether η > 0 or η ∈ (−1, 0).
3.2. Asymptotic Independence of a Central Order Statistic and Spacings
in Its Neighborhood. We now assume k/n = p + o(n−1/2 ) and establish the
independence of Xk:n and spacings around it.
3.2.1. The Uniform Parent. Using the (well-known) joint pdf of the consecutive
standard uniform order statistics Uk−s:n , . . . , Uk:n , . . . , Uk+r:n , we first obtain the
joint pdf of appropriately normalized Uk:n and the vector
{n(Uk+j:n − Uk+j−1:n ), j = −(s − 1), . . . , 0, . . . , r} ,
and thus determine the limiting form of the joint pdf.
The joint pdf of Uk−s:n , · · · , Uk+r:n is given by

n!
uk−s−1 (1 − uk+r )n−k−r ,
(k − s − 1)!(n − k − r)! k−s
p
for 0 < uk−s < · · · < uk < · · · < uk+r < 1. With tn = [p(1 − p)]/n consider the
transformation
v0
v1∗
(15)

v1

= (uk:n − p)/tn ,
= n(uk:n − uk−1:n ), . . . , vs∗ = n(uk−s+1:n − uk−s:n );
= n(uk+1:n − uk:n ), . . . , vr = n(uk+r:n − uk+r−1:n ).

Hence
uk:n

=

p + tn v0

uk+1:n
···

=

p + tn v0 + (1/n)v1

uk+r:n
···

=

p + tn v0 + (1/n)(v1 + v2 + · · · + vr )

uk−1:n
···

=

p + tn v0 − (1/n)v1∗

uk−s:n

=

p + tn v0 − (1/n)(v1∗ + v2∗ + · · · + vs∗ ),

and the Jacobian is

∂u
∂v

= tn /nr+s . The joint pdf of V0 , V1 , . . . , Vr , V1∗ , . . . , Vs∗ is

n!
tn
{p + tn v0 − (1/n)(v1∗ + v2∗ + · · · + vs∗ )}k−s−1
(k − s − 1)!(n − k − r)! nr+s

∼

=

×{1 − p − tn v0 − (1/n)(v1 + v2 + · · · + vr )}n−k−r ,
n!
tn ps (1 − p)r (p + tn v0 )k−s−1 (1 − p − tn v0 )n−k−r
(k − 1)!(n − k)!
(v ∗ + v2∗ + · · · + vs∗ ) k−s−1
}
×{1 − 1
n(p + tn v0 )
(v1 + v2 + · · · + vr ) n−k−r
×{1 −
}
,
n(1 − p − tn v0 )
η1 × η2 × η3 ,

8

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

√
say. Since k = np + o( n) and tn → 0,

η2 → exp{−(v1∗ + v2∗ + · · · + vs∗ )} and η3 → exp{−((v1 + v2 + · · · + vr )}

for fixed r and s. Further,
n!
tn ps (1 − p)r (p + tn v0 )k−s−1 (1 − p − tn v0 )n−k−r
(k − 1)!(n − k)!
n!
∼
tn (p + tn v0 )k−1 (1 − p − tn v0 )n−k ,
(k − 1)!(n − k)!
√
the pdf of V0 = (Uk:n −p)/tn . With k = np+o( n), using Stirling’s approximations
for the factorials and the expansion log(1 + x) = x − x2 /2 + o(x2 ) for x close to 0,
it can be shown that this pdf converges to φ(v0 ).
The conclusion of the above discussion is summarized below.
√
Lemma 2. With k = np + o( n), asymptotically (i) V0 , V1 , . . . , Vr , V1∗ , . . . , Vs∗
are mutually independent, (ii) V0 is N (0, 1), and (iii) the remaining rvs are i.i.d.
standard exponential, where the rvs involved are defined in (15).
η1

=

3.2.2. Arbitrary Parent. By establishing density convergence under the assumption
that k/n = p + o(n−1/2 ) we have shown above that
√
n
d
p
(16)
(Uk:n − p) → N (0, 1).
p(1 − p)
The conclusion in (16) also follows from J. K. Ghosh (1971) who has shown that if
f (xp ) is positive and finite,
√
nf (xp )
d
p
(Xk:n − xp ) → N (0, 1).
p(1 − p)

We have shown in Section 3.1 that when k/n = p + o(1), if condition (11) holds or
if (12) holds and f (xp ) is finite and positive,
F −1 (Uk+j+1:n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n ) a.s. 1
Xk+j+1:n − Xk+j:n
=
;
→
Uk+j+1:n − Uk+j:n
Uk+j+1:n − Uk+j:n
f (xp )

and if (12) and (13) hold,

Xk+j+1:n − Xk+j:n
F −1 (Uk+j:n + ∆k+j:n ) − F −1 (Uk+j:n ) a.s.
=
→ M (p, θ),
∆θk+j:n
∆θk+j:n
for j = −s, . . . , 0, . . . , r − 1. Further,

F −1 (Uk:n ) − F −1 (p) a.s. 1
Xk:n − xp
→
=
Uk:n − p
Uk:n − p
f (xp )

whenever f (xp ) is finite and positive;

|Xk:n − xp |
|F −1 (Uk:n ) − F −1 (p)| a.s.
=
→ M (p, θ),
θ
|Uk:n − p|
|Uk:n − p|θ

if (13) holds.
√
In view of Lemma 2, assuming k = np + o( n) we have established the asymptotic independence of the normalized spacings (Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n ) introduced in
Theorem 1 and appropriately normalized Xk:n under the conditions stated there.
This discussion leads to the following result.

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

9

Theorem 2. Let k/n = p + o(n−1/2 ), 0 < p < 1, and r and s be fixed positive
integers.
(a) If condition (11) holds, or if (12) holds and f (xp ) is finite and positive,
!
√
nf (xp )(Xk:n − xp )
p
, nf (xp )(Xk+j:n − Xk+j−1:n ), −(s − 1) ≤ j ≤ r
p(1 − p)
d

→ (N (0, 1), Zs∗ , . . . , Z1∗ , Z1 , . . . , Zr ).
(b) Assume (12) and (13) hold. Then
!
1/θ

√
1/θ
(Xk:n − xp )
Xk+j+1:n − Xk+j:n
n
p
, −s ≤ j ≤ r − 1
,n
M (p, θ)
M (p, θ)
p(1 − p)
d

→ (|N (0, 1)|, Zs∗ , . . . , Z1∗ , Z1 , . . . , Zr ).

In both cases the Zi ’s and Zi∗ ’s are Exp(1) rvs, and the r + s + 1 components in the
limit vector are mutually independent.
3.3. Remarks - The Central Case. Siddiqui (1960) considered higher order
spacings around a central order statistic and showed that when F is continuously
twice differentiable and f (xp ) is finite and positive, the rvs
√
nf (xp )(Xk:n − xp )
p
, nf (xp )(Xk:n − Xk−s:n ) and nf (xp )(Xk+r:n − Xk:n )
p(1 − p)

are asymptotically independent when k/n → p ∈ (0, 1) with r/n and s/n tending
to zero; further, asymptotically the higher order spacings are Gam(r) and Gam(s),
respectively. We have proved a more refined result here with less assumptions on
the properties of F , but have taken r and s to be fixed.
Pyke’s (1965) classic paper on spacings shows (Theorem 5.1) that
nf (xp1 )(Xi:n − Xi−1:n ) and nf (xp2 )(Xj:n − Xj−1:n ) with i/n → p1 and j/n → p2
where 0 < p1 6= p2 < 1 are asymptotically i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. The key difference
is that the spacings considered there are far apart, while our focus is on adjacent
spacings around Xi:n .
The asymptotic half-normal distribution of the normalized central order statistic
under the conditions of part (b) of Theorem 2 is comparable to Chanda’s (1975)
conclusion; our condition (13) is on F −1 whereas his comparable condition (given
as (6) there) is on F .
4. The Intermediate Case
Here we lean on the work of Falk (1989) and directly examine the convergence
of the joint pdf of an intermediate order statistic Xk:n and spacings around it. We
assume k → ∞ but k/n → 1 as n → ∞ such that n − k → ∞ and assume one
of the von Mises sufficient conditions stated in (5)–(7) holds. Theorem 2.1 of Falk
(1989) shows that
√
d
(17)
(Xk:n − an )/bn → N (0, 1) with an = F −1 (k/n); bn = n − k/(nf (an )).
This is established by showing that the pdf of (Xk:n − an )/bn at x,
n!
[F (an + bn x)]k−1 [1 − F (an + bn x)]n−k bn f (an + bn x) → φ(x),
(18)
(k − 1)!(n − k)!
for all real x.

10

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

Consider the joint pdf of Xk−s:n , . . . , Xk:n , . . . , Xk+r:n :
r
s
Y
Y
n!
f (xj )][1 − F (xr )]n−k−r ,
f (x∗j )][F (x∗s )]k−s−1 f (x0 )[
[
(k − s − 1)!(n − k − r)! j=1
j=1

for x∗s < · · · < x∗1 < x0 < x1 < · · · < xr . Define

1
1
bn
=
=√
−1 (k/n))
nf (an )
nf
(F
n−k
and consider the transformation
(19)

cn =

y0
y1
y1∗

(20)

= (xk:n − an )/bn ,
= (xk+1:n − xk:n )/cn , . . . , yr = (xk+r:n − xk+r−1:n )/cn ,

= (xk:n − xk−1:n )/cn , . . . , ys∗ = (xk−s+1:n − xk−s:n )/cn ,

so that
xk:n
xk+j:n
xk−j:n
The Jacobian is

∂x
∂y

= an + b n y 0 ;
= an + bn y0 + cn (y1 + · · · + yj ), j = 1, . . . , r;

= an + bn y0 − cn (y1∗ + · · · + yj∗ ), j = 1, . . . , s.
= bn cnr+s and the joint pdf of Y0 , Y1 , . . . , Yr , Y1∗ , . . . , Ys∗ , de-

fined in (20), is
(21)
(22)
(23)
(24)

(25)
(26)

n!
[F (an + bn y0 )]k−1 [1 − F (bn + an y0 )]n−k bn f (an + bn y0 )
(k − 1)!(n − k)!
k−s−1

F (an + bn y0 − cn (y1∗ + · · · + ys∗ ))
×
F (an + bn y0 )

s 
Y
f (an + bn y0 − cn (y1∗ + · · · + yj∗ ))
cn (k − j)
×
F (an + bn y0 )
j=1

r 
Y
f (an + bn y0 + cn (y1 + · · · + yj ))
cn (n − k − j + 1)
×
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
j=1

n−k−r
1 − F (an + bn y0 + cn (y1 + · · · + yr ))
×
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
= τ1 × τ2 × τ3 × τ4 × τ5 ,

where τ1 − τ5 are respectively given by (21)-(25), y0 is real, and yi , yi∗ > 0.
From (18) it follows that τ1 → φ(y0 ). We will establish the limits for remaining
τi using the following lemma.
Lemma 3. Suppose one of the von Mises conditions stated in (5)–(7) holds, and
n → ∞, k/n → 1 such that n − k → ∞. Then, with an and bn given by (17), the
following statements hold.
(a) For any real y0 ,

1−F (an +bn y0 )
1−F (an )

=

n(1−F (an +bn y0 ))
n−k

√
(b) If cn = bn / n − k, for any y0 , y1 real,

→ 1.

f (an +bn y0 +cn y1 )
f (an )

→ 1.

Proof. (a) From Theorem 2.1 of Falk (1989) it follows that (17) holds under the
conditions we have assumed, and the limit distribution is N (0, 1). From Theorem

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

11

1 of Smirnov (1967) [Remark(ii)
of Falk (1989)] it then follows that [n − k + 1 +
√
n(F (an + bn y0 ) − 1)]/ n − k + 1 → x for all real y0 . Thus,


√
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
n−k+1· 1−
→ y0
1 − F (an )

since 1 − F (an ) = (n − k)/n. This implies that (1 − F (an + bn y0 ))/(1 − F (an )) → 1
for any real y0 .
(b) In the proof of his Theorem 2.1, Falk establishes that whenever one of the
sufficient conditions stated in (5)–(7) holds, for any real y for which F (an +bn y) → 1
(or equvivalently an + bn y → x1 ) as n → ∞,
(27)

f (an + bn θy)/f (an ) → 1

uniformly for θ ∈ (0, 1) where an and bn are given in (17). Part (a) that we just
proved implies that for any real y0 , F (an + bn y0 ) → 1 as n → ∞. Thus from (27)
it follows that f (an + bn θy0 )/f (an ) → 1 for all real y0 .
For large n − k and real y1 ,
y1
y1
y0 + √
∈ (0, 2y0 ) if y0 > 0; y0 + √
∈ (2y0 , 0) if y0 < 0.
n−k
n−k

−1
Using (27) with y = 2y0 we conclude that f (an + 2y0 θbn ){f (a
√ n )} → 1 uniformly
for all 0 ≤ θ < 1. Since an + bn y0 + cn y1 = an + bn (y0 + y1 / n − k) is in (an , an +
2y0 bn ) if y0 > 0 and in (an +2y0 bn , an ) if y0 < 0. Hence f (an + bn y0 + cn y1√
)/f (an ) →
n − k)y1 )/f (an ) →
1 for all real
y
=
6
0
and
real
y
.
When
y
=
0,
for
any
real
y
,
f
(a
+
b
(1/
0
1
0
1
n
n
√
1 since 1/ n − k ∈ (0, 1) and (27) holds. This completes the proof of the claim in
(b).



With y = y1∗ + · · · + ys∗ > 0 consider the following component of τ2 in (22):

F (an + bn y0 ) − F (an + bn y0 − cn y)
F (an + bn y0 )
f (an + bn y0 − θ∗ cn y)
= 1−
· cn y
F (an + bn y0 )
ydk,n
= 1−
k
where the second form above follows from the mean value theorem, θ∗ ∈ (0, 1), and
F (an + bn y0 − cn y)
F (an + bn y0 )

dk,n =

=

1−

f (an + bn y0 + θ∗ cn (−y)) k
1
,
F (an + bn y0 )
f (an )
n

where we have used the fact that cn = 1/nf (an ). From part (a) of Lemma 3 the
first factor of dk,n above converges to 1; from part (b), the second factor approaches
1, and from our assumptions about k and n made in the intermediate case, the third
factor also approaches 1. Hence dk,n → 1 as n, k → ∞. Thus upon recalling (22)
we obtain
k−s−1

s
X
ydk,n
yj∗ )}, yj∗ > 0.
→ exp{−y} = exp{−(
τ2 = 1 −
k
j=1
With y = y1∗ + · · · + yj∗ , the j th term in the product representing τ3 in (23) is
given by
f (an + bn y0 + cn (−y))
1
k − j f (an + bn y0 + cn (−y))
cn (k − j)
=
.
F (an + bn y0 )
n
f (an )
F (an + bn y0 )

12

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

Using Lemma 3 as we did in proving dk,n → 1 as n and n − k → ∞, we conclude
that the j th factor of τ3 → 1 for all j and so does τ3 .
With y = y1 + y2 + · · · + yj , the j th term in the product representing τ4 in (24)
is given by


f (an + bn y0 + cn y)
cn (n − k − j + 1)
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
1 − F (an )
n − k − j + 1 f (an + bn y0 + cn y)
·
·
.
=
n(1 − F (an ))
f (an )
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
Since F (an ) = k/n, the first factor above converges to 1, and Lemma 3 shows that
the other two factors also approach 1 as n and n − k → ∞. Thus τ4 → 1.
Finally with y = y1 + · · · + yr consider the following component of τ5 in (25):
F (an + bn y0 + cn y) − F (an + bn y0 )
1 − F (an + bn y0 + cn y)
=1−
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
1 − F (an + bn y0 )

f (an + bn y0 + θ∗ cn y)
· cn y from the Mean Value Theorem
1 − F (an + bn y0 )
f (an + bn y0 + θ∗ cn y)
1 − F (an )
1
= 1−y
·
·
f (an )
1 − F (an + bn y0 ) n(1 − F (an ))
= 1−

where θ∗ ∈ (0, 1) and we have used the fact that cn = 1/nf (an ). Lemma 3 implies
that the first two factors of y converge to 1 as n, n − k → ∞, and the denominator
of the last factor, n(1 − F (an )), is n − k. Hence,
y1 + · · · + yr n−k−r
)
→ e−(y1 +···+yr ) , y1 , . . . , yr > 0,
τ5 ∼ (1 −
n−k
as n, n − k → ∞.
Thus, we have formally proved the following theorem.
Theorem 3. Whenever one of the Von Mises condition (5)–(7) holds, and n, k, n−
k → ∞ such that k/n → 1, with an = F −1 (k/n) and cn = 1/nf (an),
((Xk−s:n − Xk−s+1:n )/cn , · · · , (Xk:n − Xk−1:n )/cn , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/cn , · · · ,
d

· · · , (Xk+r:n − Xk+r−1:n )/cn ) → (Zs∗ , · · · , Z1∗ , Z1 , · · · , Zr );
1
d
√
(Xk:n − an ) → N (0, 1),
cn n − k
where the Zi∗ ’s and Zi ’s are Exp(1) rvs, and the r + s + 1 limiting rvs are mutually
independent.
4.1. Remarks - The Intermediate Case. When F ∈ D(G1;α ),
F −1 (k/n)cn
an f (an )
=
→α
1 − F (an )
n−k

and hence α(n − k)/F −1 (k/n) can be chosen as cn . When F ∈ D(G2;α ), the
Von Mises condition implies α(n − k)/(x1 − F −1 (k/n)) can be used as cn . When
F ∈ D(G3 ), [nf (an )m(an )/(n − k)] → 1 and we can use m(an )/(n − k) as our cn .
From Theorem 3 it follows that as in the central case, asymptotically, any two
spacings, possibly of higher order, formed by nonoverlaping collections of order
statistics around an intermediate order statistic Xk:n are independent, and the
collection is independent of Xk:n .

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

13

Teugels (2001) has introduced a family C ∗ of cdfs F with the following property:
F has an ultimately positive pdf f and for all real y,

 

1−F (x)


F
x
+
yh(x)
−
F
(x)
f (x)
1
→ y,

h(x) 
1 − F (x)

whenever h(x) → 0 as x → x1 . He states that the condition F ∈ C ∗ ‘slightly
generalizes’ Falk’s (1989) version of von Mises conditions (i.e., (5)–(7)). Assuming
F ∈ C ∗ , Teugels shows that upon normalization described above (i) Xk:n is asymptotically normal and (ii) (Xk:n − Xk−s:n ) is asymptotically Gam(s). Their joint
distribution and the asymptotic independence are not discussed there.
5. The Upper Extreme Case
We now assume that k → ∞ such that n − k is fixed. It is well-known that when
F ∈ D(G) for G given in (4),
(28)

d

((Xn:n − an )/bn , · · · , (Xk:n − an )/bn ) → (W1 , · · · , Wn−k+1 )

where for any finite fixed j the vector (W1 , · · · , Wj ) has the same joint distribution
as


−1/α
(29)
Z1
, (Z1 + Z2 )−1/α , . . . , (Z1 + · · · + Zj )−1/α , if G = G1;α ;


1/α
(30)
−Z1 , −(Z1 + Z2 )1/α , . . . , −(Z1 + · · · + Zj )1/α , if G = G2;α ;
and if G = G3 ,
(31)

d

(W1 , · · · , Wj ) = (− ln Z1 , − ln(Z1 + Z2 ), . . . , − ln(Z1 + · · · + Zj ))
d

(32)

=

∞
X
Zi − 1
i=k

i

+γ−

k−1
X
i=1

1
, k = 1, . . . , j
i

!

where the Zi ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. The first three representations above are from
Nagaraja (1982) who also shows that the joint limiting distribution (W1 , . . . , Wj )
is identical to the joint distribution of the first j lower record values from the cdf
G. The representation in (32) is due to Hall (1978), and is more convenient when
G = G3 . Thus, whenever F ∈ D(G), the limiting form of the joint distribution of
the normalized spacings and the concerned extreme order statistics can be described
as follows:
((Xn:n − Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/bn , (Xk:n − an )/bn ,
(Xk:n − Xk−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk−s+1:n − Xk−s:n )/bn ))
d

(33)

→ (W1 − W2 , . . . , Wn−k − Wn−k+1 , Wn−k+1 ,

Wn−k+1 − Wn−k+2 , . . . , Wn−k+s − Wn−k+s+1 )

where the Wj ’s have one of the forms given in (29) - (32). We now specialize our
results for each of the three domains.

14

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

5.1. The Fréchet Domain. In this case an can be chosen to be 0 and bn to be
F −1 (1 − 1/n) (= x1−n−1 ). The representation in (33) for the limiting joint distribution along with (29) suggests that an extreme spacing is not asymptotically
exponential, and the adjacent spacings are neither independent, nor identically distributed in the limit. The asymptotic independence of the spacings and the extreme
order statistic also fails. Hence when F ∈ D(G1;α ), the asymptotic distributional
structure for the extreme spacings differs from that for the central and intermediate
cases.
From (28) and (29) we conclude that when F ∈ D(G1;α ), the normalized higher
order spacing,
d

d

−1/α

(Xn:n − Xn−j:n )/bn → W1 − Wj+1 = Z1

− (Z1 + Sj )−1/α ,

where the sum Sj = Z2 + · · · + Zj+1 is a Gam(j) rv that is independent of Z1 . This
distributional representation complements the work of Pakes and Steutel (1997)
who have given an expression for the cdf of the limiting rv as (p. 192)
P (W1 ≤ w) + P (W1 − (Sj + W1−α )−1/α ≤ w, W1 > w), w > 0.
They comment that this expression for the cdf ‘does not seem susceptible to simplification for any choice of the parameter α’; for the other two domains, they provide
explicit distributional representation that is equivalent to ours (see below).
5.2. The Weibull Domain. Here x1 (= F −1 (1)) is finite and can be chosen to
be our an and the scaling constant bn can be chosen to be x1 − x1−1/n . From
(33) and (30) we can conclude that the normalized adjacent spacings are asymptotically i.i.d. exponential iff α = 1 when F ∈ D(G2;α ). Otherwise, they are
all dependent. When α = 1 and k < n, the joint asymptotic distributional
structure of ((Xn:n − Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/bn , (Xk:n − an )/bn , (Xk:n −
Xk−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk−s+1:n − Xk−s:n )/bn ) is that of
(34)

(Z2 , . . . , Zn−k+1 , −(Z1 + · · · + Zn−k+1 ), Zn−k+2 , · · · , Zn−k+s+1 ) .

Thus when α = 1, Xk:n is asymptotically independent of the spacings in its left
neighborhood, but is symmetrically dependent on the ones on its right. This conclusion is formalized in the following result.
Theorem 4. When F ∈ D(G2;α=1 ), for each fixed n − k and s, the asymptotic joint distribution of ((Xn:n − Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/bn , (Xk:n −
an )/bn , (Xk:n − Xk−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk−s+1:n − Xk−s:n )/bn ) has the representation
given by (34), where the Zj ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. The bn can be chosen as
x1 − F −1 (1 − 1/n). When F ∈ D(G2;α ) the adjacent spacings are i.i.d. exponential
iff α = 1.
The standard uniform distribution is in D(G2;α ) with α = 1 and hence has
asymptotically i.i.d. extreme spacings. We had reached this conclusion earlier in
Lemma 1 (recall x1 − F −1 (1 − 1/n) = 1/n). But we have a more general result
now that describes the symmetric dependence of the right neighborhood spacings
on Xk:n and is applicable to all F ∈ D(G2;1 ). In fact with n − k fixed, given
(Xk:n − x1 )/bn = u (< 0), (Xn:n − Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/bn behave like
the spacings from a random sample of size n − k from a uniform distribution over
(u, 0). For the form of the joint distribution, see, e.g., David and Nagaraja (2003;
Sec. 6.4).

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

15

From (28) and (30) we conclude that when F ∈ D(G2;α ), the normalized higher
order spacing
d

d

1/α

(Xn:n − Xn−j:n )/bn → W1 − Wj+1 = (Z1 + Sj )1/α − Z1

,

where the sum Sj = Z2 + · · · + Zj+1 is a Gam(j) rv that is independent of Z1 . This
is the conclusion of Theorem 7.2 in Pakes and Steutel (1997).
5.3. The Gumbel Domain. Using (33) along with the representation for Wj in
(32), we conclude the following.
Theorem 5. When F ∈ D(G3 ), for each fixed n − k and s, the asymptotic joint
distribution of ((Xn:n −Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n −Xk:n )/bn , (Xk:n −an )/bn , (Xk:n −
Xk−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk−s+1:n − Xk−s:n )/bn ) has the following distributional representation:
(35)
!
∞
n−k
X
X 1 Zn−k+1
Z2
Zn−k
Zi − 1
Zn−k+s
Z1 ,
,··· ,
,
+γ−
,
,··· ,
2
n−k
i
i n−k+1
n−k+s
i=1
i=n−k+1

where the Zi ’s are i.i.d. Exp(1) rvs. The bn can be chosen as m(F −1 (1 − 1/n)),
and if (7) holds, as {nf (F −1 (1 − 1/n))}−1 .
The representation in (35) shows that while Xk:n is independent of spacings in
its right neighborhood, it is correlated with the spacings in its left neighborhood,
and this correlation decreases at the rate of 1/(n − k + j), j ≥ 1 as one moves away
from it. This is in contrast with the situation when F ∈ D(G2,1 ).
Weissman (1978) has considered the limit distribution of
((Xn:n − Xn−1:n )/bn , . . . , (Xk+1:n − Xk:n )/bn , (Xk:n − an )/bn ),
and has given the representation given by the first (n − k) components of the vector
in (35). He has also noted the independence of these spacings and Wn−k+1 (in his
Theorem 2).
The above theorem shows that by using varying scaling sequences for the spacings, we can obtain i.i.d. standard exponential distributions in the limit. In particular we have the following:
d

((n − j + 1)(Xn−j+1:n − Xn−j:n )/bn , j = 1, . . . , n − k + s) → (Z1 , · · · , Zn−k+s ).
From (28) and (32) or from the representation (35) we can conclude that when
F ∈ D(G3 ), the normalized higher order spacing,
d

d

(Xn:n − Xn−j:n )/bn → W1 − Wj+1 = Z1 +

Zj d
Z2
= Zj:j .
+ ··· +
2
j

The last equality above follows from the representation for exponential order statistics given in (3). This is the conclusion reached in Theorem 7.1 of Pakes and
Steutel (1997).
5.4. Remarks - The Extreme Case.

16

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

5.4.1. Cox Processes. Whenever F ∈ D(G), we can say that the arrival process
of order statistics in the left neighborhood of an upper extreme order statistic is
asymptotically a Poisson process and is independent of its value only when F ∈ G2
with α = 1. The arrival processes on both sides of the extreme order statistics
are pure birth processes when F ∈ G3 ; only the arrival process on the right side is
independent of the order statistic.
Harshova and Hüsler (2000) have shown that the arrival processes on the left
neighborhood of the sample maximum are special Cox processes, when G is of
Weibull (G2;α ) or Gumbel (G3 ) type cdf. Cox processes are mixed Poisson processes
where the time-dependent intensity λ(t) is itself a stochastic process (Daley and
Vere-Jones (2003; Sec. 6.2)). Harshova and Hüsler consider the counting process in
the left neighborhood of Xn:n , Nn (·), defined by Nn ([a, b)) = #{Xi ∈ [Xn:n − a ·
d

dn , Xn:n − b · dn )}, 0 < a < b. From their Theorem 1.2 it follows that Nn (·) → N (·)
where {N (t), t > 0} is a Cox process with stochastic intensity function λ(t) = et−W
in the Gumbel case where W has cdf G3 ; and λ(t) = α(t − W )α−1 in the Weibull
case where W has cdf G2;α . The cdfs G2;α and G3 are given in (4). Representations
given in (30), and (31) or (32) provide another characterization of the resulting Cox
processes in terms of the distribution of inter-arrival times of order statistics below
the maximum.

5.4.2. Higher Order Extreme Spacings. The representation for the special higher
order extreme spacing involving the sample maximum (Xn:n − Xn−j:n , discussed
above) can be expanded to other extremes. From (28) - (30), and (32) we conclude
that as n → ∞, for fixed 1 ≤ i < j, (Xn−i+1:n − Xn−j+1:n )/bn converges in
distribution to
j
i
X
X
Zl )−1/α − (
(
Zl )−1/α
l=1

l=1

j
i
X
X
1/α
Zl )1/α
Zl )
−(
(
l=1

(36)

l=1

Zi
Zj−1
+ ···+
i
j−1

d

= Wi − (Wi−α + Gam((j − i)))−1/α , G ∈ D(G1;α );
d

= (Wiα + Gam((j − i)))

1/α

− Wi , G ∈ D(G2;α ),

d

= Gam((j − i)), G ∈ D(G2;1 );
d

= Zj−i:j−1 , G ∈ D(G3 ).

Here the last distributional equality follows from (3). The above representations are
extremely helpful in providing the asymptotic distribution theory for the number of
order statistics around a specified extreme order statistic. This will be illustrated
in the next section where all cases (central, extreme, and intermediate) will be
considered.
6. Counts of Observations Around an Order Statistic
Consider the following count statistics that track the number of observations in
the right and left neighborhoods of Xk:n :
K− (n, k, d) = #{j : Xj ∈ (Xk:n − d, Xk:n )},

K+ (n, k, d) = #{j : Xj ∈ (Xk:n , Xk:n + d)}.

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

17

Clearly,
(37)

P (K− (n, k, d) < i) = P (Xk:n − Xk−i:n > d),
P (K+ (n, k, d) < j) = P (Xk+j:n − Xk:n > d),

and thus the asymptotic distribution theory for spacings developed here can be
directly applied to determine the limit distributions of the count statistics for appropriately chosen d that is dependent on n. Pakes and Steutel (1997) have used
the link in (37) in the reverse direction in the extreme case where they derive the
limit distribution of K− (n, n, dn ) first and use it to determine the limit distribution
of the spacing Xn:n − Xn−k:n .
As noted in the introduction, the literature on the investigation into the limit
distribution of K− and K+ is substantial. Poisson limits are generally obtained
when d = dn is nonrandom but is dependent on the behavior of F around the
concerned statistic. We now discuss implications of our results on spacings on
the asymptotic distribution of counts and compare our results with only the most
relevant results in the literature.
6.1. The Central and Intermediate Cases - The Poisson Counts. We have
seen in Theorems 1 and 3 that the (Xk+i:n − Xk+i−1:n )/cn are asymptotically
i.i.d. standard exponential for any fixed (positive or negative) integer i, where
cn = 1/nf (xpn ) with pn ≡ p = lim(k/n) ∈ (0, 1) in the central case, and in
the intermediate case, pn = k/n → 0 or 1 such that, respectively k or n − k → ∞.
In other words, K− (n, k, λ1 cn ) and K+ (n, k, λ2 cn ) are asymptotically independent,
and Poi(λ1 ) and Poi(λ2 ) rvs, respectively. This conclusion matches with that of
Pakes (2009) who has established the asymptotic Poisson property under a variety of
technical conditions for the central [Theorem 16] and intermediate cases [Theorems
9, 10 (b), 12 (b)].
Dembińska et al. (2007) have established the asymptotic Poisson nature of both
K− and K+ for dn that depends on the local property of the quantile function F −1
in the intermediate case and an associated technical condition on F in the central
case. Their condition for Poisson convergence of K+ (n, k, dn ) for a central order
statistic [(17) in their Theorem 5.2] is
(38)

lim(x,y)→(xp,0+ )

F (x + y) − F (x)
= 1.
F (xp + y) − F (xp )

This is comparable to our condition (12), but there are differences in these conditions and their implications. While (12) specifies the behavior of the quantile function F −1 around p, (38) puts a similar condition on the property of the cdf F around
xp . Dembińska et al.’s neighborhood is determined by dn = F −1 (p + λ/n) − xp ,
a quantity dependent on the behavior of F −1 at (p + λ/n). In contrast, our
dn = λ/n(f (xp )) depends on the behavior of F −1 only at xp . When f is continuous around xp and f (xp ) is positive and finite, from L’Hospital’s rule it follows
that (38) is readily satisfied, and F −1 (p + λ/n) − xp ∼ λ/n(f (xp )).
Under (38) and a similar condition on the left neighborhood, Dembińska and
Balakrishnan (2010) have established the asymptotic independence of K− and K+ .
This independence readily follows from our Theorems 2 and 3. The technical conditions used in Dembińska et al. (2007) in the intermediate case (in their Theorem
6.1, for example) appear difficult to verify whereas the familiar von Mises conditions needed here are known to hold for many common distributions. In addition,

18

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

our results show that counts in disjoint intervals are Poisson and independent, and
also that these are independent of the location of Xk:n . These finer conclusions
on the limiting structure of the neighborhood cannot be reached using any of the
currently available results in the literature on count statistics for the central and
intermediate cases.
6.2. The Upper Extremes - NonPoisson and Poisson Counts. Asymptotic
distributions of K− (n, k, d) and K+ (n, k, d) have been investigated by many authors when k or n − k are held fixed starting from the work of Pakes and Steutel
(1997) who looked at K− (n, n, d). Assuming k is held fixed, Pakes and Li (1998)
showed that K− (n, n − k, d) is asymptotically negative binomial, and Balakrishnan
and Stepanov (2005) showed that K+ (n, n − k, d) is asymptotically binomial. The
success probability in these distributions is given by
β(d) = lim

x→x1

F (x + d)
∈ (0, 1),
F (x)

where x1 is assumed to be infinite.
Pakes (2009) has considered the limit distribution of K+ (n, n − k, cbn ) with k
fixed assuming that F is in the domain of attraction of either Fréchet or Gumbel
distribution and the bn ’s form the associated scaling sequence. When F ∈ D(G1;α )
he shows that the limit distribution of K+ (n, n − k, bn ) is mixed binomial with
parameters k and random success probability that is a function of a Gam(k + 1)
rv (his Theorem 5, part (a)). When F ∈ D(G3 ), K+ (n, n − k, λbn ) is shown to be
asymptotically a Binomial rv with parameters k and success probability 1 − e−λ
(his Theorem 4).
We now examine the consequences of the representations in (36) and the relations
in (37). When k is fixed and F ∈ D(G3 ), for any j, 1 ≤ j ≤ k,
P (K+ (n, n − k, λbn ) < j)

=

P (Xn−k+j:n − Xn−k:n > λbn )
j−1  
X
k
(1 − e−λ )i (e−λ )k−i ,
→ P (Zj:k > λ) =
i
i=0

as n → ∞. Since the maximum value attainable is k, the limit distribution is
binomial, a result noted above. Further,
P (K− (n, n − k, λbn ) < j) =

P (Xn−k:n − Xn−k−j:n > λbn )

j−1 
X
k+j
(1 − e−λ )i (e−λ )k+j−i ,
→ P (Zj:k+j > λ) =
i
i=0

resulting in a negative binomial distribution, a result shown by Pakes and Li (1998).
They also derive the limit distribution of K− (n, n − k, λbn ) in other cases; the
representations in (36) along with (37) yield us the same results. Of these, a
commonly known distribution is obtained only when F ∈ D(G2;1 ) in which case
K+ (n, n − k, λbn ) has a censored Poi(λ) distribution that is censored on the right
at k; this conclusion was reached in Theorem 4.1 of Dembińska et al. (2007) under
a set of technical conditions similar to the one given in (38). Further, K− (n, n −
k, λbn ) will have a Poi(λ) distribution and these two statistics are asymptotically
independent.
Whenever F ∈ D(G1;α or G2;α6=1 ), we can obtain the asymptotic distributions of
K− and K+ using (36) and (37) directly. For example, when F ∈ D(G1;α ) we can

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

19

use the corresponding representation in (36) to obtain the cdf of K+ (n, n − k, bn ) in
terms of Gamma rvs (in contrast with the mixed binomial representation of Pakes
(2009) mentioned earlier). While closed form expression for the cdf may not be
available, the needed probabilities can be evaluated using tractable univariate integrals that involve gamma type integrands that can be easily evaluated numerically.
The link between Gamma and Poisson cdfs comes in handy in this simplification.
7. Discussion
We now provide further illustrations of applications of our results to distribution
theory and inference.
7.1. Examples. Our examples thus far were the uniform and exponential populations, but our results are widely applicable since the conditions imposed here are
satisfied by several common distributions. In the central case, we need positivity
and continuity of the population pdf at xp to achieve independent Poisson arrival
process in both right and left neighborhoods. Von Mises conditions are satisfied
by the common distributions that are in the domain of attraction of an extreme
value cdf G (given in (4)) and thus the intermediate case also leads to independent
Poisson arrival process for these distributions. The extreme case does not require
the von Mises conditions, and provides interesting examples of situations where we
do not get Poisson processes. For example, for F ∈ D(G1;α ), a property satisfied
by Pareto and loggamma distributions, the arrival process is no longer Poisson.
Tables 3.4.2-3.4.4 of Embrechts et al. (1997) contain a good list of distributions in
the domain of attraction of each of the three extreme value distributions along with
the necessary norming (scaling) constants needed for the application of our results
in the extreme case.
Our intermediate and extreme case discussions focussed on the upper end of the
sample. Parallel results hold for the lower end of the sample and upper-end and
lower-end spacings can exhibit different types of clustering processes. For example,
in the exponential parent case, upper extremes are in the Gumbel domain, and the
lower extremes are in the Weibull domain with α = 1 (i.e., Exp (1)). Thus, for
the lower extremes, we have a homogeneous Poisson arrival process in the right
neighborhood, whereas for the upper extremes, we have a pure birth process in the
left neighborhood of the concerned order statistic.
7.2. Inferential Implications. Theorem 2 (a) can be used in the central case
to provide (asymptotically) distribution-free estimates of xp and f (xp ) as noted by
Siddiqui (1960) when he studied the joint distribution of Xk:n , Xk+r:n −Xk:n , Xk:n −
Xk−s:n [See Sec. 3.3 Remarks]. It follows from Theorem 2 that nf (xp )(Xk+r:n −
Xk−s:n ) is asymptotically Gam(r +s) and this fact can be used to provide estimates
of f (xp ) and confidence intervals for the population pdf at
√ the pth quantile. The
asymptotic independence of nf (xp )(Xk+r:n − Xk−s:n ) and nf (xp )(Xk:n − xp ) and
their known familiar distributions can be used to find the distribution of the pivotal
quantity
(Xk:n − xp )
√
.
n(Xk+r:n − Xk−s:n )
From Theorem 2 it follows that this rv behaves asymptotically as the ratio of a
standard normal and an independent gamma rv (or a scaled chi-square rv) and this

20

H. N. NAGARAJA, KARTHIK BHARATH, AND FANGYUAN ZHANG

distribution is free of f (xp ). It easily leads to an asymptotically distribution-free
confidence interval for xp .
A similar application of Theorem 3 would provide asymptotically distributionfree inference for the intermediate population quantile F −1 (k/n) and pdf f (F −1 (k/n))
when one of the Von-Mises conditions is assumed to hold.
In the extreme case, we have seen that the limit distributions of the top k order
statistics are dependent on the domain of attraction. Weissman (1978) has discussed
in detail inference on tail parameters (extreme quantiles and the tail index 1/α)
based on these limit results.
7.3. Concluding Remarks. It is interesting to note that norming/scaling constants for Xk:n and the adjacent spacings are of the same order only for the extreme
case (bn ); the limiting distributions are similar as well (functions of Exp(1) rvs).
For the central and intermediate cases, the spacings and Xk:n are scaled differently,
and their limit distributions are different; the spacings are related to exponential
whereas Xk:n relates to the normal. For the extreme and intermediate cases our
sufficient conditions that ensure the nondegenerate limit distributions for Xk:n and
for the adjacent spacings are
√the same. In the central case, asymptotic normality
for Xk:n requires k = np+o( n) (actually slightly less restriction on k would work),
the asymptotic independence property of spacings holds whenever k = np + o(n).
We have focussed here on neighborhoods of a single selected order statistic; this
work can easily be extended to multiple neighborhoods. In the case of two or
more central order statistics and their neighborhoods, we obtain a multivariate
normal limit distribution for the selected order statistics and independent Poisson
processes around them. Such a set up is considered in Theorem 3.1 of Dembińska
and Balakrishnan (2010) where the independence of Poisson counts in right and
left neighborhoods of multiple central order statistics is derived. In other cases
(for example, one upper extreme, and another lower, considered in Theorem 2.1
of Dembińska and Balakrishnan (2010)), the resulting counting processes will turn
out to be independent.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank two anonymous reviewers for a close reading of the manuscript
and many helpful suggestions.
References
[1] Balakrishnan N. and Stepanov A. (2005). A note on the number of observations near an order
statistic. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 134, 1-14.
[2] Chanda K. C. (1975). Some comments on the asymptotic probability laws of sample quantiles.
Calcutta Statistical Association Bulletin, 24, 123-126.
[3] Daley D. J. and Vere-Jones, D. (2003). An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes,
Volume I: Elementary Theory and Methods, Second Edition. Springer, New York, NY.
[4] David H. A. and Nagaraja H. N. (2003). Order Statistics, Third Edition. Wiley, Hoboken NJ.
[5] de Haan L. (1970). On regular variation and its application to the weak convergence of sample
extremes. Mathematical Centre Tracts 32, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam.
[6] Dembińska A. and Balakrishnan N. (2010). On the asymptotic independence of numbers of
observations near order statistics. Statistics, 44, 517-528.
[7] Dembińska A., Stephanov A. and Wesolowski J. (2007). How many observations fall in a
neighborhood of an order statistic? Communications in Statistics -Theory and Methods, 36,
851-867.

SPACINGS AROUND AN ORDER STATISTIC

21

[8] Embrechts P., Klüppelberg C. and Mikosch T. (1997). Modelling Extremal Events. Springer,
Berlin.
[9] Falk M. (1989). A note of uniform asymptotic normality of intermediate order statistics. Annals
of Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 41, 19-29.
[10] Ghosh J. K. (1971). A new of proof of Bahadur’s representation of quantiles and an application. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 42, 1957-1961.
[11] Ghosh M. and Sukhatme S. (1981). On Bahadur’s representation of quantiles in nonregular
cases. Communications in Statistics -Theory and Methods, 10, 269-282.
[12] Gnedenko B. V. (1943). Sur la distribution limite du terme maximum d’une série altéatoire,
Annals of Mathematics, 44, 423-453.
[13] Hall P. (1978). Representations and limit theorems for extreme value distributions. Journal
of Applied Probability, 15, 639-644.
[14] Harshova E. and Hüsler J. (2000). On the number of near-maxima, Rendiconti del Circolo
Mathematico di Palermo, Serie II, Supplementi, 65, 121-136.
[15] Nagaraja H. N. (1982). Record values and extreme value distributions. Journal of Applied
Probability, 19, 233-239.
[16] Pakes A. G. (2009). Number of Observations near order statistics. Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Statistics, 51 (4), 375-395.
[17] Pakes A. G. and Li Y. (1998). Limit laws for the number of near maxima via the Poisson
approximation. Statistics and Probability Letters, 40, 395-401.
[18] Pakes A. G. and Steutel F. (1997). On the number of records near the maximum. Australian
Journal of Statistics, 39, 179-192.
[19] Pyke R. (1965). Spacings. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 27, 395-436.
[20] Reiss R-D. (1989). Approximate Distributions of Order Statistics. Springer-Verlag, New York.
[21] Siddiqui M. M. (1960). Distribution of quantiles in samples from a bivariate population.
Journal of Research, National Bureau of Standards, 64B, 145-150.
[22] Smirnov N. V. (1952). Limit distributions for the terms of a variational series. American
Mathematical Translations, Series 1, No. 67. Original published in 1949.
[23] Smirnov N. V. (1967). Some remarks on limit laws for order statistics. Theory of Probability
and Its Applications, 12, 82-143.
[24] Teugels, J. L. (2001). On order statistics close to the maixmum. In: M. de Gunst, C. Klaassen,
and A. van der Vaart (Eds.) State of the Art in Probability and Statistics, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Beachwood OH, 568-581.
[25] von Mises R. (1936). La distribution de la plus grande de n valeurs. Review of Mathematical
Union Interbalkanique, 1, 141-160.
[26] Weissman I. (1978). Estimation of parameters and larger quantiles based on the k largest
observations. Journal of American Statistical Association, 73, 812-815.
Division of Biostatistics, The Ohio State University, 1841 Neil Avenue, Columbus,
OH 43210, USA.
E-mail address: nagaraja.1@osu.edu
School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nottingham,, University Park, Nottingham NG72RD, UK
E-mail address: karthikbharath@gmail.com
Department of Statistics, The Ohio State University,, 1958 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH
43210, USA
E-mail address: zhang.1243@buckeyemail.osu.edu

