Estimation of Mean Residual Life

arXiv:1707.02484v2 [] 11 Jul 2017

W. J. Hall
Department of Biostatistics
University of Rochester
Rochester, NY
e-mail: hall@bst.rochester.edu

Jon A. Wellner∗
Department of Statistics
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-4322
e-mail: jaw@stat.washington.edu

url: http://www.stat.washington.edu/jaw/
Abstract: Yang [1978b] considered an empirical estimate of the mean residual life function on a fixed
finite interval. She proved it to be strongly uniformly consistent and (when appropriately standardized)
weakly convergent to a Gaussian process. These results are extended to the whole half line, and the
variance of the the limiting process is studied. Also, nonparametric simultaneous confidence bands for
the mean residual life function are obtained by transforming the limiting process to Brownian motion.
AMS 2000 subject classifications: Primary 62P05, 62N05, 62G15;Secondary 62G05, 62E20.
Keywords and phrases: life expectancy, consistency, limiting Gaussian process, confidence
bandsconsistency, confidence bands, life expectancy, limiting Gaussian process.

Contents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Introduction and summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Convergence on R+ ; covariance function of the limiting process
Alternative sufficient conditions; V ar[Z(x)] as x → ∞. . . . . .
Examples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Confidence bands for e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Illustration of the confidence bands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Further developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.1 Confidence bands and inference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.2 Censored data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.3 Median and quantile residual life functions . . . . . . . . .
7.4 Semiparametric models for mean and median residual life
7.5 Monotone and Ordered mean residual life functions . . . .
7.6 Bivariate residual life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

∗ Supported

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

2
3
7
8
9
11
12
12
15
15
15
16
16
16

in part by NSF Grant DMS-1104832 and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation

1
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

2

1. Introduction and summary
This is an updated version of a Technical Report, Hall and Wellner [1979], that, although never published, has
been referenced repeatedly in the literature: e.g., Csörgő and Zitikis [1996], Berger et al. [1988], Csörgő et al.
[1986], Hu et al. [2002], Kochar et al. [2000], Qin and Zhao [2007].
Let X1 , . . . , Xn be a random sample from a continuous d.f. F on R+ = [0, ∞) with finite mean µ = E(X),
variance σ 2 ≤ ∞, and density f (x) > 0. Let F = 1 − F denote the survival function, let Fn and Fn denote
the empirical distribution function and empirical survival function respectively, and let
Z ∞
e(x) ≡ eF (x) ≡ E(X − x|X > x) =
F dI/F (x),
0≤x<∞
x

denote the mean residual life function or life expectancy function at age x. We use a subscript F or F on e
interchangeably, and I denotes the identity function and Lebesgue measure on R+ .
A natural nonparametric or life table estimate of e is the random function ên defined by

Z ∞
Fn dI/Fn (x) 1[0,Xnn ) (x)
ên (x) =
x

where Xnn ≡ max1≤i≤n Xi ; that is, the average, less x, of the observations exceeding x. Yang [1978b] studied
ên on a fixed finite interval 0 ≤ x ≤ T < ∞. She proved that ên is a strongly uniformly consistent estimator
of e on [0, T ], and that, when properly centered and normalized, it converges weakly to a certain limiting
Gaussian process on [0, T ].
We first extend Yang’s (1978) results to all of R+ by introducing suitable metrics. Her consistency result
is extended in Theorem 2.1 by using the techniques of Wellner [1977, 1978]; then her weak convergence result
is extended in Theorem 2.2 using Shorack [1972] and Wellner [1978].
It is intuitively clear that the variance of ên (x) is approximately σ 2 (x)/n(x) where
σ 2 (x) = V ar[X − x|X > x]
is the residual variance and n(x) is the number of observations exceeding x; the formula would be justified if
these n(x) observations were a random sample of fixed sized n(x) from the conditional distribution P (·|X >
x). Noting that Fn (x) = n(x)/n → F (x) a.s., we would then have
nV ar[ên (x)] = nσ 2 (x)/n(x) → σ 2 (x)/F (x).
Proposition 2.1 and Theorem 2.2 validate this (see (2.4) below): the variance of the limiting distribution of
n1/2 (ên (x) − e(x)) is precisely σ 2 (x)/F (x).
In Section 3 simpler sufficient conditions for Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 are given and the growth rate
of the variance of the limiting process for large x is considered; these results are related to those of
Balkema and de Haan [1974]. Exponential, Weibull, and Pareto examples are considered in Section 4.
In Section 5, by transforming (and reversing) the time scale and rescaling the state space, we convert the
limit process to standard Brownian motion on the unit interval (Theorem 5.1); this enables construction of
nonparametric simultaneous confidence bands for the function eF (Corollary 5.2). Application to survival
data of guinea pigs subject to infection with tubercle bacilli as given by Bjerkedal [1960] appears in Section 6.
We conclude this section with a brief review of other previous work. Estimation of the function e, and
especially the discretized life-table version, has been considered by Chiang; see pages 630-633 of Chiang [1960]
and page 214 of Chiang [1968]. (Also see Chiang [1968], page 189, for some early history of the subject.)
The basis for marginal inference (i.e.
√ at a specific age x) is that the estimate ên (x) is approximately normal
with estimated standard error Sk / k, where k = nFn (x) is the observed number of observations beyond x
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

3

and Sk is the sample standard deviation of those observations. A partial justification of this is in Chiang
[1960], page 630, (and is made precise in Proposition 5.2 below). Chiang [1968], page 214, gives the analogous
marginal result for grouped data in more detail, but again without proofs; note the solumn Sêi in his Table
8, page 213, which is based on a modification and correction of a variance formula due to Wilson [1938]. We
know of no earlier work on simultaneous inference (confidence bands) for mean residual life.
A plot of (a continuous version of) the estimated mean residual life function of 43 patients suffering
from chronic gramulocytic leukemia is given by Bryson and Siddiqui [1969]. Gross and Clark [1975] briefly
mention the estimation of e in a life - table setting, but do not discuss the variability of the estimates
(or estimates thereof). Tests for exponentiality against decreasing mean residual life alternatives have been
considered by Hollander and Proschan [1975].
2. Convergence on R+ ; covariance function of the limiting process
Let {an }n≥1 be a sequence of nonnegative numbers with an → 0 as n → ∞. For any such sequence and a
d.f. F as above, set bn = F −1 (1 − an ) → ∞ as n → ∞. Then, for any function f on R+ , define f ∗ equal to f
for x ≤ bn and 0 for x > bn : f ∗ (x) = f (x)1[0,bn ] (x). Let kf kba ≡ supa≤x≤b |f (x)| and write kf k if a = 0 and
b = ∞.
R1
Let H(↓) denote the set of all nonnegative, decreasing functions h on [0, 1] for which 0 (1/h)dI < ∞.
Condition 1a. There exists h ∈ H(↓) such that

M1 ≡ M1 (h, F ) ≡ sup

R∞

Condition 1b. There exists h ∈ H(↓) for which

R∞

h(F )dI/h(F (x))
< ∞.
e(x)
x
R∞
Since 0 < h(0) < ∞ and e(0) = E(X) < ∞, Condition 1a implies that 0 h(F )dI < ∞. Also note that
h(F )/h(0) is a survival function on R+ and that the numerator in Condition 1a is simply eh(F )/h(0) ; hence
Condition 1a may be rephrased as: there exists h ∈ H(↓) such that M1 ≡ keh(F )/h(0) /eF k < ∞.
x

0

h(F )dI < ∞ and keh(F )k < ∞.

Bounded eF and existence of a moment of order greater than 1 is more than sufficient for Condition 1b (see
Section 3).
Theorem 2.1. Let an = αn−1 log log n with α > 1. If Condition 1a holds for a particular h ∈ H(↓), then
ρh(F )e/F (ê∗n , e∗ )


|ên (x) − e(x)|F (x)
: x ≤ bn →a.s. 0 as n → ∞.
≡ sup
h(F (x))e(x)

(2.1)

If Condition 1b holds, then
ρ1/F (ê∗n , e∗ )
≡ sup{|ên (x) − e(x)|F (x) : x ≤ bn } →a.s. 0 as n → ∞.

(2.2)

The metric in (2.2) turns out to be a natural one (see Section 5); that in (2.1) is typically stronger.

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

4

Proof. First note that for x < Xnn
F (x)
ên (x) − e(x) =
Fn (x)

(

−

R∞
x

(Fn − F )dI
F (x)

)
e(x)
+
(Fn (x) − F (x)) .
F (x)

Hence
ρh(F )e/F (ê∗n , e∗ )

≤
≤
→a.s.

F
Fn

bn

F
Fn

bn

0

0

(

sup
x

|

R∞

(Fn − F )dI|
|Fn (x) − F (x)|
+ sup
h(F (x))e(x)
h(F (x))
x

x

)

· ρh(F ) (Fn , F )(M1 + 1)

0

using Condition 1a, Theorem 1 of Wellner [1977] to show ρh(F ) (Fn , F ) →a.s. 0 a.s., and Theorem 2 of Wellner
[1978] to show that lim supn kF /Fn kb0n < ∞ a.s..
Similarly, using Condition 1b,

Z ∞
b 
F n
sup |
(Fn − F )dI| + sup e(x)|Fn (x) − F (x)|
≤
ρ1/F (ê∗n , e∗ )
Fn 0
x
x
x
Z ∞

bn
F
≤
· ρh(F ) (Fn , F )
h(F )dI + keh(F )k
Fn 0
0
→a.s. 0.
To extend Yang’s weak convergence results, we will use the special uniform empirical processes Un of
the Appendix of Shorack [1972] or Shorack and Wellner [1986] which converge to a special Brownian bridge
process U in the strong sense that
ρq (Un , U) →p 0 as n → ∞
for q ∈ Q(↓), the set of all continuous functions on [0, 1] which are monotone decreasing on [0, 1] and
R 1 −2
dI < ∞. Thus Un = n1/2 (Γn − I) on [0, 1] where Γn is the empirical d.f. of special uniform (0, 1)
0 q
random variables ξ1 , . . . , ξn .
Define the mean residual life process on R+ by
 Z ∞

1
1/2
1/2
1/2
n (ên (x) − e(x)) =
−
n (Fn − F )dI + e(x)n (Fn (x) − F (x))
Fn (x)
x

 Z ∞
1
d
Un (F )dI + e(x)Un (F (x))
−
=
Γn (F (x))
x
≡

Zn (x),

0 ≤ x < F −1 (ξnn )

where ξnn = max1≤i≤n ξi , and Zn (x) ≡ −n1/2 e(x) for x ≥ F −1 (ξnn ). Thus Zn has the same law as n1/2 (ên −e)
and is a function of the special process Un . Define the corresponding limiting process Z by
 Z ∞

1
Z(x) =
−
U(F )dI + e(x)U(F (x)) ,
0 ≤ x < ∞.
(2.3)
F (x)
x
If σ 2 = V ar(X) < ∞ (and hence under either Condition 2a or 2b below), Z is a mean zero Gaussian process
on R+ with covariance function described as follows:
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

5

Proposition 2.1. Suppose that σ 2 = V ar(X) < ∞. For 0 ≤ x ≤ y < ∞
Cov[Z(x), Z(y)] =

F (y)
σ 2 (y)
V ar[Z(y)] =
F (x)
F (y)

(2.4)

where
2

σ (t) ≡ V ar[X − t|X > t] =

R∞
t

(x − t)2 F (x)
F (t)

− e2 (t)

is the residual variance function; also
Cov[Z(x)F (x), Z(y)F (y)] = V ar[Z(y)F (y)] = F (y)σ 2 (y).
Proof. It suffices to prove (2.5). Let Z′ ≡ ZF ; from (2.3) we find
Cov[Z′ (x), Z′ (y)]

= e(x)e(y)F (x)F (y) − e(x)

Z

(2.5)

∞

F (x)F (z)dz
y

Z ∞
− e(y)
(F (y ∧ z) − F (y)F (z))dz
x
Z ∞Z ∞
(F (z ∧ w) − F (z)F (w))dzdw.
+
x

y

Expressing integrals over (x, ∞) as the sum of integrals over (x, y) and (y, ∞), and recalling the defining
formula for e(y), we find that the right side reduces to
Z ∞Z ∞
(F (z ∧ z) − F (z)F (w)dzdw − e2 (y)F (y)F (y)
y

y

=

Z

∞

y

(t − y)2 dF (t) − F (y)e2 (y)

= F (y)σ 2 (y)
which, being free of x, is also V ar[Z′ (y)].
As in this proposition, the process Z is often more easily studied through the process Z′ = ZF ; such
a study continues in Section 5. Study of the variance of Z(x), namely σ 2 (x)/F (x), for large x appears in
Section 3.
Condition 2a. σ 2 < ∞ and there exists q ∈ Q(↓) such that
R∞
q(F )dI/q(F (x))
< ∞.
M2 ≡ M2 (q, F ) ≡ sup x
e(x)
x
R∞
Since 0 < q(0) < ∞ and e(0) = E(X) < ∞, Condition 2a implies that 0 q(F )dI < ∞; Condition 2a may
be rephrased as: M2 ≡ keq(F )/q(0) /eF k < ∞ where eq(F )/q(0) denotes the mean residual life function for the
survival function q(F )/q(0).
R∞
Condition 2b. σ 2 < ∞ and there exists q ∈ Q(↓) such that 0 q(F )dI < ∞.
Bounded eF and existence of a moment of order greater than 2 is more than sufficient for 2b (see Section 3).

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

6

Theorem 2.2. (Process convergence). Let an → 0, nan → ∞. If Condition 2a holds for a particular
q ∈ Q(↓), then
ρq(F )e/F (Z∗n , Z∗ )


|Zn (x) − Z(x)|F (x)
: x ≤ bn →p 0
≡ sup
q(F (x))e(x)

as n → ∞.

(2.6)

If Condition 2b holds, then
ρ1/F (Z∗n , Z∗ ) ≡ sup{|Zn (x) − Z(x)|F (x) : x ≤ bn } →p 0

as n → ∞.

(2.7)

Proof. First write


Zn (x) − Z(x) =


F (x)
− 1 Z1n (x) + (Z1n (x) − Z(x))
Γn (F (x))

where
Z1n (x) ≡

1
F (x)

∞

 Z
−

x


Un (F )dI + e(x)Un (F (x)) ,

0 ≤ x < ∞.

Then note that, using Condition 2a,
ρq(F )e/F (Z1n , 0)

R∞

Un (F )dI
x
+ ρq (Un , 0)
q(F
(x))e(x)
x
ρq (Un , 0){M2 + 1)} = Op (1);

≤

sup

≤

|

n
→p 0 by Theorem 0 of Wellner (1978) since nan → ∞; and, again using Condition 2a,
that kI/Γn − 1k1−a
0
that
R∞
| x (Un (F ) − U(F ))dI|
1
ρq(F )e/F (Zn , Z) ≤ sup
+ ρq (Un , U)
q(F (x))e(x)
x
≤ ρq (Un , U){M2 + 1} →p 0.

Hence
1−a

n
I
−1
ρq(F )e/F (Z1n , 0) + ρq(F )e/F (Z1n , Z)
Γn
0
= op (1)Op (1) + op (1) = op (1).

ρq(F )e/F (Z∗n , Z∗ )

≤

Similarly, using Condition 2b
ρ1/F (Z1n , 0)

≤

sup

≤ sup

∞

Un (F )dI + sup e(x)|Un (F (x))|
x
Z ∞

ρq (Un , 0)
q(F )dI + keq(F )k = Op (1),
x

≤
ρ1/F (Z1n , Z)

Z

x

0

Z

∞

(Un (F ) − U(F ))dI + sup e(x)|Un (F (x)) − U(F (x))|
x
Z ∞

≤ ρq (Un , U)
q(F )dI + keq(F )k →p 0,
x

x

0

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

7

and hence
1−a

ρ1/F (Z∗n , Z∗ )

n
I
ρ1/F (Z1n , 0) + ρ1/F (Z1n , Z)
−1
Γn
0
= op (1)Op (1) + op (1) = op (1).

≤

3. Alternative sufficient conditions; V ar[Z(x)] as x → ∞.
Our goal here is to provide easily checked conditions which will imply the somewhat cumbersome Conditions
2a and 2b; similar conditions also appear in the work of Balkema and de Haan [1974], and we use their
results to extend their formula for the residual coefficient of variation for large x ((3.1) below). This provides
a simple description of the behavior of V ar[Z(x)], the asymptotic variance of n1/2 (ên (x) − e(x)) as x → ∞.
Condition 3. E(X r ) < ∞ for some r > 2.
Condition 4a. Condition 3 and limx→∞

d
dx (1/λ(x))

= c < ∞ where λ = f /F , the hazard function.

Condition 4b. Condition 3 and lim supx→∞ {F (x)1+γ /f (x)} < ∞ for some r−1 < γ < 1/2.
Proposition 3.1. If Condition 4a holds, then 0 ≤ c ≤ r−1 , Condition 2a holds, and the squared residual
coefficient of variation tends to 1/(1 − 2c):
1
σ 2 (x)
=
.
x→∞ e2 (x)
1 − 2c

(3.1)

lim

If Condition 4b holds, then Condition 2b holds.
Corollary 3.1. Condition 4a implies
V ar[Z(x)] ∼

e2 (x)
(1 − 2c)−1
F (x)

as x → ∞.
γ

Proof. Assume 4a. Choose γ between r−1 and 1/2; define a d.f. G on R+ by G = F and note that
g/G = γf /F = γλ. By Condition 3 xr F (x) R→ 0 as x → ∞ and hence xγr G(x) → 0 as x → ∞. Since γr > 1,
∞
G has a finite mean and therefore eG (x) = x GdI/G(x) is well-defined.
Set η = 1/λ = F /f , and note that η(x)G(x) → 0 as x → ∞. (If lim sup η(x) < ∞, then it holds trivially;
otherwise, η(x) → ∞ (because of 4a) and lim η(x)G(x) = lim(η(x)/x)(xG(x)) = lim η ′′ (x)xG(x) = 0 by 4a
and L’Hopital. Thus by L’Hopital’s rule
0

≤ lim

η(x)G(x)
η(x)
= lim R ∞
eG (x)
x GdI

η(x)g(x) − G(x)η ′ (x)
G(x)
′
= γ − lim η (x) = γ − c by 4a.

= lim

Thus c ≤ γ for any γ > r−1 and it follows that c ≤ r−1 . It is elementary that c ≥ 0 since η = 1/λ is
nonnegative.
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

8

Choose q(t) = (1 − t)γ . Then γ − c > 0, q ∈ Q(↓), and to verify 2a it now suffices to show that
lim(η(x)/eF (x)) = 1 − c < ∞ since it then follows that
lim

eG (x)
η(x)/eF (x)
1−c
= lim
=
< ∞.
eF (x)
η(x)/eG (x)
γ−c

By continuity and eG (0) < ∞, 0 < eF (0) < ∞, this implies Condition 2a. But r > 2 implies that xF (x) → 0
as x → ∞ so η(x)F (x) → 0 and hence
lim

ηF (x)
η(x)
= lim R ∞
= lim(1 − η ′ (x)) = 1 − c.
eF (x)
F
dI
x

That (3.1) holds will now follows from results of Balkema and de Haan [1974], as follows: Their Corollary
to Theorem 7 implies that P (λ(t)(X − t) > x|X > t) → e−x if c = 0 and → (1 + cx)−1/c if c > 0.
Thus, in the former case, F is in the domain of attraction of the Pareto residual life distribution and its
related extreme value distribution. Then Theorem 8(a) implies convergence of the (conditional) mean and
variance of λ(t)(X − t) to the mean and variance of the limiting Pareto distribution, namely (1 − c)−1 and
(1 − c)−2 (1 − 2c)−1 . But the conditional mean of λ(t)(Xt ) is simply λ(t)e(t), so that λ(t) ∼ (1 − c)−1 /e(t)
and (3.1) now follows.
R∞
γ
If Condition 4b holds, let q(F ) = F again. Then 0 q(F )dI < ∞, and it remains to show that
lim sup{e(x)F (x)γ } < ∞. This follows from 4b by L’Hopital.
Similarly, sufficient conditions for Conditions 1a and 1b can be given: simply replace “2” in Condition 3
and “1/2” in Condition 4b with “1”, and the same proof works. Whether (3.1) holds when r in Condition 3
is exactly 2 is not known.
4. Examples.
The typical situation, when e(x) has a finite limit and Condition 3 holds, is as follows: e ∼ F /f ∼ f /(−f ′ )
as x → ∞ (by L’Hopital), and hence 4b, 2b, and 1b hold; also η ′ ≡ (F /f )′ = [(F/f )(−f /f ′)] − 1 → 0 (4a
with c = 0, and hence 2a and 1a hold), σ(x) ∼ e(x) from (3.1), and V ar[Z] ∼ e2 /F ∼ (F /f )2 /F ∼ 1/(−f ′ ).
We treat three examples, not all ‘typical’, in more detail.
Example 4.1. (Exponential). Let F (x) = exp(−x/θ), x ≥ 0, with 0 < θ < ∞. Then e(x) = θ for all x ≥ 0.
Conditions 4a and 4b hold (for all r, γ ≥ 0) with c = 0, so Conditions 2a and 2b hold by Proposition 3.1
with q(t) = (1 − t)1/2−δ , 0 < δ < 1/2. Conditions 1a and 1b hold with h(t) = (1 − t)1−δ , 0 < δ < 1. Hence
Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 hold where now
Z 1
U(F (x))
1
U
d
Z(x) =
−
dI = θB(ex/θ ), 0 ≤ x < ∞
1 − (x)
1 − F (x) F (x) 1 − I
R1
and B is standard Brownian motion on [0, ∞). (The process B1 (t) = U(1 − t) − 1−t (U/(1 − I))dI, 0 ≤ t ≤ 1,
is Brownian motion on [0, 1]; and with B2 (x) ≡ xB1 (1/x) for 1 ≤ x ≤ ∞, Z(x) = θB2 (1/F (x)) = θB2 (ex/θ ).)
Thus, in agreement with (2.4),
Cov[Z(x), Z(y)] = θ2 e(x∧y)/θ ,

0 ≤ x, y < ∞.

d

An immediate consequence is that kZ∗n F k →d kF k = θ sup0≤t≤1 |B1 (t)|; generalization of this to other F ’s
appears in Section 5. (Because of the “memoryless” property of exponential F , the results for this example
can undoubtedly be obtained by more elementary methods.)
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

9

Example 4.2. (Weibull). Let F (x) = exp(−xθ ), x ≥ 0, with 0 < θ < ∞. Conditions 4a and 4b hold (for
all r, γ > 0) with c = 0, so Conditions 1 and 2 hold with h and q as in Example 1 by Proposition 3.1. Thus
Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 hold. Also, e(x) ∼ θ−1 x1−θ as x → ∞, and hence V ar[Z(x)] ∼ θ−2 x2(1−θ) exp(xθ ) as
x → ∞.

Example 4.3. (Pareto). Let F (x) = (1 + cx)−1/c , x ≥ 0, with 0 < c < 1/2. Then e(x) = (1 − c)−1 (1 + cx),
and Conditions 4a and 4b hold for r < c−1 and γ ≥ c (and c of 4a is c). Thus Proposition 3.1 holds with
r > 2 and c > 0 and V ar[Z(x)] ∼ c2+(1/c) (1 − c)−2 (1 − 2c)−1 x2+(1/c) as x → ∞. Conditions 1 and 2 hold
with h and q as in Example 1, and Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 hold.
If instead 1/2 ≤ c < 1, then E(X) < ∞ but E(X 2 ) = ∞, and 4a and 4b hold with 1 < r < 1/c ≤ 2 and
γ ≥ c. Hence Condition 1 and Theorem 2.1 hold, but Condition 2 (and hence our proof of Theorem 2.2)
fails. If c ≥ 1, then E(X) = ∞ and e(x) = ∞ for all x ≥ 0.
Not surprisingly, the limiting process Z has a variance which grows quite rapidly, exponentially in the
exponential and Weibull cases, and as a power (> 4) of x in the Pareto case.
5. Confidence bands for e.

We first consider the process Z′ ≡ ZF on R+ which appeared in (2.5) of Proposition 2.1. Its sample analog
Z′n ≡ Zn Fn is easily seen to be a cumulative sum (times n−1/2 ) of the observations exceeding x, each centered
at x+ e(x); as x decreases the number of terms in the sum increases. Moreover, the corresponding increments
apparently act asymptotically independently so that Z′n , in reverse time, is behaving as a cumulative sum of
zero-mean independent increments. Adjustment for the non-linear variance should lead to Brownian motion.
Let us return to the limit version Z′ .
The zero-mean Gaussian process Z′ has covariance function Cov[Z′ (x), Z′ (y)] = V ar[Z′ (x ∨ y)] (see (2.5));
hence, when viewed in reverse time, it has independent increments (and hence Z′ is a reverse martingale).
Specifically, with Z′′ (s) ≡ Z′ (− log s), Z′′ is a zero-mean Gaussian process on [0, 1] with independent
increments and V ar[Z′′ (s)] = V ar[Z′ (− log s)] ≡ τ 2 (s). Hence τ 2 is increasing in s, and, from (2.5),
τ 2 (s) = F (− log s)σ 2 (− log s).

(5.1)

Now τ 2 (1) = σ 2 (0) = σ 2 , and
τ 2 (0) = lim F (− log ǫ)σ 2 (− log ǫ) = lim F (x)σ 2 (x) = 0
x→∞

ǫ↓0

since
0 ≤ F (x)σ 2 (x) ≤ F (x)E(X 2 |X > x) =

Z

∞

x

y 2 dF (y) → 0.

Since f (x) > 0 for all x ≥ 0, τ 2 is strictly increasing.
Let g be the inverse of τ 2 ; then τ 2 (g(t)) = t, g(0) = 0, and g(σ 2 ) = 1. Define W on [0, 1] by
W(t) ≡ σ −1 Z′′ (g(σ 2 t)) = σ −1 Z′ (− log g(σ 2 t)).

(5.2)

Theorem 5.1. W is standard Brownian motion on [0, 1].
Proof. W is Gaussian with independent increments and V ar[W(t)] = t by direct computation.
Corollary 5.1. If (2.7) holds, then
′

′

ρ(Zn∗ , Z ∗ ) ≡ sup |Zn (x)Fn (x) − Z(x)F (x)| = op (1)
x≤bn

and hence kZn Fn kb0n →d kZF k = σkWk10

as n → ∞.

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

10

Proof. By Theorem 0 of Wellner [1978] kFn /F − 1kb0n →p 0 as n → ∞, and this together with (2.7) implies
the first part of the statement. The second part follows immediately from the first and (5.2).
Replacement of σ 2 by a consistent estimate Sn2 (e.g. the sample variance based on all observations), and
of bn by b̂n = F−1
n (1 − an ), the (n − m)−th order statistic with m = [nan ], leads to asymptotic confidence
bands for e = eF :
Corollary 5.2. Let 0 < a < ∞, and set dˆn (x) ≡ n−1/2 aSn /Fn (x). If (2.7) holds, Sn2 →p σ 2 , and
nan / log log n ↑ ∞, then, as n → ∞


P ên (x) − dˆn (x) ≤ e(x) ≤ ên (x) + dˆn (x) for all 0 ≤ x ≤ b̂n
→ Q(a)

(5.3)

where
Q(a)

≡ P (kWk10 < a) =

∞
X

k=−∞

(−1)k {Φ((2k + 1)a) − Φ((2k − 1)a)}

= 1 − 4{Φ(a) − Φ(3a) + Φ(5a) − · · · }
and Φ denotes the standard normal d.f.
Proof. It follows immediately from Corollary 5.1 and Sn →p σ > 0 that
kZn Fn kb0n /Sn →d kZF k/σ = kWk10 .
Finally bn may be replaced by b̂n without harm: letting cn = 2 log log /(nan ) → 0 and using Theorem 4S of
d
1/2
−1
−1
Wellner [1978], for τ > 1 and all n ≥ N (ω, τ ), b̂n ≡ F−1
(Γ−1
({1 + τ cn }(1 −
n (1 − an ) = F
n (1 − an )) ≤ F
an )) w.p. 1. This proves the convergence claimed in the corollary; the expression for Q(a) is well-known (e.g.
see Billingsley [1968], page 79).
The approximation 1 − 4Φ(a) for Q(a) gives 3-place accuracy for a > 1.4. A short table appears below:
Table 1
Q(a) for selected a
a
2.807
2.241
1.960

Q(a)
.99
.95
.90

a
1.534
1.149
0.871

Q(a)
.75
.50
.25

Thus, choosing a so that Q(a) = β, (5.3) provides a two-sided simultaneous confidence band for the
function e with confidence coefficient asymptotically β. In applications we suggest taking an = n−1/2 so that
b̂n is the (n − m)−th order statistic with m = [n1/2 ]; we also want m large enough for an adequate central
limit effect, remembering that the conditional life distribution may be quite skewed. (In a similar fashion,
one-sided asymptotic bands are possible, but they will be less trustworthy because of skewness.)
Instead of simultaneous bands for all real x one may seek (tighter) bands on e(x) for one or two specific
x−values. For this we can apply Theorem 2.2 and Proposition 2.1 directly. We first require a consistent
estimator of the asymptotic variance of n1/2 (ên (x) − e(x)), namely σ 2 (x)/F (x).
Proposition 5.1. Let 0 ≤ x < ∞ be fixed and let Sn2 (x) be the sample variance of those observations
exceeding x. If Condition 3 holds then Sn2 (x)/Fn (x) →a.s. σ 2 (x)/F (x).

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

11

Proof. Since Fn (x) →a.s. F (x) > 0 and
Sn2 (x)

=

2

R∞
x

(y − x)Fn (y)dy
Fn (x)

− ê2n (x),

R∞
R∞
it suffices to show that x yFn (y)dy →a.s. x yF (y)dy. Let h(t) = (1 − t)γ+1/2 and q(t) = (1 − t)γ with
R∞
r−1 < γ < 1/2 so that h ∈ H(↓), q ∈ Q(↓), and 0 q(F )dI < ∞ by the proof of Proposition 3.1. Then,
Z ∞
Z ∞
Z ∞
yFn (y)dy −
yF (y)dy ≤ ρh(F ) (Fn , F )
Ih(F )dI →a.s. 0
x

x

0

by Theorem 1 of Wellner (1977) since
Z ∞
Z
Ih(F )dI =
0

∞

0

(I 2 F )1/2 q(F )dI < ∞.

By Theorem 2.2, Propositions 2.1 and 5.1, and Slutsky’s theorem we have:
Proposition 5.2. Under the conditions of Proposition 5.1,
1/2

dn (x) ≡ n1/2 (ên (x) − e(x))Fn (x)/Sn (x) →d N (0, 1)

as n → ∞.

This makes feasible an asymptotic confidence interval for e(x) (at this particular fixed x). Similarly,
for x < y, using the joint asymptotic normality of (dn (x), dn (y)) with asymptotic correlation
{F (y)σ 2 (y)/F (x)σ 2 (x)}1/2 estimated by
{Fn (y)Sn2 (y)/Fn (x)Sn2 (x)}1/2 ,
an asymptotic confidence ellipse for (e(x), e(y)) may be obtained.
6. Illustration of the confidence bands.
We illustrate with two data sets presented by Bjerkedal [1960] and briefly mention one appearing in Barlow
and Campo (1975).
Bjerkedal gave various doses of tubercle bacilli to groups of 72 guinea pigs and recorded their survival
times. We concentrate on Regimens 4.3 and 6.6 (and briefly mention 5.5, the only other complete data set
in Bjerkedal’s study M); see Figures 1 and 2 below.
First consider the estimated mean residual life ên , the center jagged line in each figure. Figure 1 has been
terminated at day 200; the plot would continue approximately horizontally, but application of asymptotic
theory to this part of ên , based only the last 23 survival times (the last at 555 days), seems unwise. Figure 2
has likewise been terminated at 200 days, omitting only nine survival times (the last at 376 days); the graph
of ên would continue downward. The dashed diagonal line is X − x; if all survival times were equal, say µ,
then the residual life function would be (µ − x)+ , a lower bound on e(x) near the origin. More specifically,
a Maclaurin expansion yields
e(x) = µ + (µf0 − 1)x + (1/2){(2µf0 − 1)f0 + f0′ }x2 + o(x2 )
where f0 = f (0), f0′ = f ′ (0), if f ′ is continuous at 0, or
e(x) = µ − x +

µd r
x + o(xr )
r!

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

12

if f (s) (0) = 0 for s < (r − 1) (≥ 0) and = d for s = r − 1 (if f (r−1) is continuous at 0). It thus seems likely
from Figures 1 and 2 that in each of these cases either f0 = 0 and f0′ > 0 or f0 is near 0 (and f0′ ≥ 0).
Also, for large x, e(x) ∼ 1/λ(x), and Figure 1 suggests that the corresponding λ and e have finite positive
limits, whereas the e of Figure 2 may eventually decrease (λ increase). We know of no parametric F that
would exhibit behavior quite like these.
The upper and lower jagged lines in the figures provide 90% (asymptotic) confidence bands for the
respective e’s, based on (5.3). At least for Regimen 4.3, a constant e (exponential survival) can be rejected.
The vertical bars at x = 0, x = 100, and x = 200 in Figure 1, and at 0, 50, and 100 in Figure 2, are 90%
(asymptotic) pointwise confidence intervals on e at the corresponding x−values (based on Proposition 5.2).
Notice that these intervals are not much narrower than the simultaneous bands early in the survival data,
but are substantially narrower later on.
A similar graph for Regimen 5.5 (not presented) is somewhat similar to that in Figure 2, with the upward
turn in ên occurring at 80 days instead of at 50, and a possible downward turn at somewhere around 250
days (the final death occurring at 598 days).
A similar graph was prepared for the failure data on 107 right rear tractor brakes presented by
Barlow and Campo [1975], page 462. It suggests a quadratic decreasing e for the first 1500 to 2000 hours
(with f (0) at or near 0 but f ′ (0) definitely positive), with X = 2024, and with a possibly constant or
slightly increasing e from 1500 or so to 6000 hours. The e for a gamma distribution with λ = 2 and α = .001
(e(x) = α−1 (αx+2)/(αx+1) with α = .001) fits reasonably well – i.e. is within the confidence bands, even for
25% confidence. Note that this is in excellent agreement with Figures 2.1(b) and 3.1(d) of Barlow and Campo
[1975]. Bryson and Siddiqui’s (1969) data set was too small (n = 43) for these asymptotic methods, except
possibly early in the data set.)
7. Further developments
The original version of this paper, Hall and Wellner [1979], ended with a one-sentence sketch of two remaining
problems: “Confidence bands on the difference between two mean residual life functions, and for the case
of censored data, will be presented in subsequent papers.” Although we never did address these questions
ourselves, others took up these further problems.
Our aim in this final section is to briefly survey some of the developments since 1979 concerning mean
residual life, including related studies of median residual life and other quantiles, as well as developments for
censored data, alternative inference strategies, semiparametric models involving mean or median residual life,
and generalizations to higher dimensions. For a review of further work up to 1988 see Guess and Proschan
[1988].
7.1. Confidence bands and inference
Csörgő et al. [1986] gave a further detailed study of the asymptotic behavior of the mean residual life
process as well as other related processes including the Lorenz curve. Berger et al. [1988] developed tests
and confidence sets for comparing two mean residual life functions based on independent samples from the
respective populations. These authors also gave a brief treatment based on comparison of median residual
life, to be discussed in Subsection 7.3 below. Csörgő and Zitikis [1996] introduced weighted metrics into the
study of the asymptotic behavior of the mean residual life process, thereby avoiding the intervals [0, xn ]
changing with n involved in our Theorems 2.1 and 2.2, and thereby provided confidence bands and intervals
for eF in the right tail. Zhao and Qin [2006] introduced empirical likelihood methods to the study of the
mean residual life function. They obtained confidence intervals and confidence bands for compact sets [0, τ ]
with τ < τF ≡ inf{x : F (x) = 1}.
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

13

Fig 1: 90% confidence bands for mean residual life; Regimen 4.3

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

14

Fig 2: 90% confidence bands for mean residual life; Regimen 6.6

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

15

7.2. Censored data
Yang [1978a] initiated the study of estimated mean residual life under random right censorship. She used
an estimator F̂n which is asymptotically equivalent to the Kaplan - Meier estimator and considered, in
particular, the case when
X is bounded and stochastically smaller than the censoring variable C. In this
√
case she proved that n(ê(x) − e(x)) converges weakly (as n → ∞) to a Gaussian process with mean zero.
Csörgő and Zitikis [1996] give a brief review of the challenges involved in this problem; see their page 1726.
Qin and Zhao [2007] extended their earlier study (Zhao and Qin [2006]) of empirical likelihood methods
to this case, at least for the problem of obtaining pointwise confidence intervals. The empirical likelihood
methods seem to have superior coverage probability properties in comparison to the Wald type intervals which
follow from our Proposition 5.2. Chaubey and Sen [1999] introduced smooth estimates of mean residual life
in the uncensored case. In Chaubey and Sen [2008] they introduce and study smooth estimators of eF based
on corresponding smooth estimators of F = 1 − F introduced by Chaubey and Sen [1998].
7.3. Median and quantile residual life functions
Because mean residual life is frequently difficult, if not impossible, to estimate in the presence of rightcensoring, it is natural to consider surrogates for it which do not depend on the entire right tail of F .
Natural replacements include median residual life and corresponding residual life quantiles. The study of
median residual life was apparently initiated in Schmittlein and Morrison [1981]. Characterization issues and
basic properties have been investigated by Gupta and Langford [1984], Joe and Proschan [1984b], and Lillo
[2005]. Joe and Proschan [1984a] proposed comparisons of two populations based on their corresponding
median (and other quantile) residual life functions. As noted by Joe and Proschan, “Some results differ
notably from corresponding results for the mean residual life function”. Jeong et al. [2008] investigated
estimation of median residual life with right-censored data for one-sample and two-sample problems. They
provided an interesting illustration of their methods using a long-term follow-up study (the National Surgical
Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, NSABP) involving breast cancer patients.
7.4. Semiparametric models for mean and median residual life
Oakes and Dasu [1990] investigated a characterization related to a proportional mean residual life model:
eG = ψeF with ψ > 0. Maguluri and Zhang [1994] studied several methods of estimation in a semiparametric
regression version of the proportional mean residual life model, e(x|z) = exp(θT z)e0 (x) where e(x|z)
denotes the conditional mean residual life function given Z = z. Chen et al. [2005] provide a nice
review of various models and study estimation in the same semiparametric proportional mean residual
life regression model considered by Maguluri and Zhang [1994], but in the presence of right censoring. Their
proposed estimation method involves inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) estimation methods
(Horvitz and Thompson [1952]; Robins and Rotnitzky [1992]). Chen and Cheng [2005] use counting process
methods to develop alternative estimators for the proportional mean residual life model in the presence of
right censoring. The methods of estimation considered by Maguluri and Zhang [1994], Chen et al. [2005], and
Chen and Cheng [2005] are apparently inefficient. Oakes and Dasu [2003] consider information calculations
and likelihood based estimation in a two-sample version of the proportional mean residual life model. Their
calculations suggest that certain weighted ratio-type estimators may achieve asymptotic efficiency, but a
definitive answer to the issue of efficient estimation apparently remains unresolved. Chen and Cheng [2006]
proposed an alternative additive semiparametric regression model involving mean residual life. Ma and Yin
[2010] considered a large family of semiparametric regression models which includes both the additive model
proposed by Chen and Cheng [2006] and the proportional mean residual life model considered by earlier
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

16

authors, but advocated replacing mean residual life by median residual life. Gelfand and Kottas [2003] also
developed a median residual life regression model with additive structure and took a semiparametric Bayesian
approach to inference.
7.5. Monotone and Ordered mean residual life functions
Kochar et al. [2000] consider estimation of eF subject to the shape restrictions that eF is increasing
or decreasing. The main results concern ad-hoc estimators that are simple monotizations of the basic
nonparametric empirical estimators ên studied here. These authors show that the nonparametric maximum
likelihood estimator does not exist in the increasing MRL case and that although the nonparametric MLE
exists in the decreasing MRL case, the estimator is difficult to compute. Ebrahimi [1993] and Hu et al. [2002]
study estimation of two mean residual life functions eF and eG in one- and two-sample settings subject to the
restriction eF (x) ≤ eG (x) for all x. Hu et al. [2002] also develop large sample confidence bands and intervals
to accompany their estimators.
7.6. Bivariate residual life
Jupp and Mardia [1982] defined a multivariate mean residual life function and showed that it uniquely
determines the joint multivariate distribution, extending the known univariate result of Cox [1962]; see
Hall and Wellner [1981] for a review of univariate results of this type. See Ma [1996, 1998] for further
multivariate characterization results. Kulkarni and Rattihalli [2002] introduced a bivariate mean residual
life function and propose natural estimators.
Remarks: This revision was accomplished jointly by the authors in 2011 and 2012. The first author passed
away in October 2012. Section 7 only covers further developments until 2012. A MathSciNet search for “mean
residual life” over the period 2011 - 2017 yielded 148 hits on 10 July 2017.
References
Balkema, A. A. and de Haan, L. (1974). Residual life time at great age. Ann. Probability, 2, 792–804.
Barlow, R. E. and Campo, R. (1975). Total time on test processes and applications to failure data analysis.
In Reliability and fault tree analysis (Conf., Univ. California, Berkeley, Calif., 1974), pages 451–481. Soc.
Indust. Appl. Math., Philadelphia, Pa.
Berger, R. L., Boos, D. D., and Guess, F. M. (1988). Tests and confidence sets for comparing two mean
residual life functions. Biometrics, 44(1), 103–115.
Billingsley, P. (1968). Convergence of probability measures. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
Bjerkedal, T. (1960). Acquisition of resistance in guinea pigs infected with different doses of virulent tubercle
bacilli. Amer. Jour. Hygiene, 72, 130–148.
Bryson, M. C. and Siddiqui, M. M. (1969). Some criteria for aging. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 64, 1472–1483.
Chaubey, Y. P. and Sen, A. (2008). Smooth estimation of mean residual life under random censoring.
In Beyond parametrics in interdisciplinary research: Festschrift in honor of Professor Pranab K. Sen,
volume 1 of Inst. Math. Stat. Collect., pages 35–49. Inst. Math. Statist., Beachwood, OH.
Chaubey, Y. P. and Sen, P. K. (1998). On smooth estimation of hazard and cumulative hazard functions.
In Frontiers in probability and statistics (Calcutta, 1994/1995), pages 91–99. Narosa, New Delhi.
Chaubey, Y. P. and Sen, P. K. (1999). On smooth estimation of mean residual life. J. Statist. Plann.
Inference, 75(2), 223–236. The Seventh Eugene Lukacs Conference (Bowling Green, OH, 1997).

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

17

Chen, Y. Q. and Cheng, S. (2005). Semiparametric regression analysis of mean residual life with censored
survival data. Biometrika, 92(1), 19–29.
Chen, Y. Q. and Cheng, S. (2006). Linear life expectancy regression with censored data. Biometrika, 93(2),
303–313.
Chen, Y. Q., Jewell, N. P., Lei, X., and Cheng, S. C. (2005). Semiparametric estimation of proportional
mean residual life model in presence of censoring. Biometrics, 61(1), 170–178.
Chiang, C. L. (1960). A stochastic study of the life table and its applications: I. probability distributions of
the biometric functions. Biometrics, 16, 618–635.
Chiang, C. L. (1968). Introduction to Stochastic Processes in Biostatistics. Wiley, New York.
Cox, D. R. (1962). Renewal theory. Methuen & Co. Ltd., London.
Csörgő, M. and Zitikis, R. (1996). Mean residual life processes. Ann. Statist., 24(4), 1717–1739.
Csörgő, M., Csörgő, S., and Horváth, L. (1986). An asymptotic theory for empirical reliability and
concentration processes, volume 33 of Lecture Notes in Statistics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Ebrahimi, N. (1993). Estimation of two ordered mean residual lifetime functions. Biometrics, 49(2), 409–417.
Gelfand, A. E. and Kottas, A. (2003). Bayesian semiparametric regression for median residual life. Scand.
J. Statist., 30(4), 651–665.
Gross, A. J. and Clark, V. A. (1975). Survival distributions: reliability applications in the biomedical sciences.
Wiley, New York.
Guess, F. and Proschan, F. (1988). Mean residual life: theory and application. In Handbook of Statistics:
Quality Control and Reliability, volume 7, pages 215–224. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Gupta, R. C. and Langford, E. S. (1984). On the determination of a distribution by its median residual life
function: a functional equation. J. Appl. Probab., 21(1), 120–128.
Hall, W. J. and Wellner, J. (1981). Mean residual life. In Statistics and related topics (Ottawa, Ont., 1980),
pages 169–184. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Hall, W. J. and Wellner, J. A. (1979). Estimation of mean residual life. Technical report, University of
Rochester.
Hollander, M. and Proschan, F. (1975). Tests for the mean residual life. Biometrika, 62(3), 585–593.
Horvitz, D. G. and Thompson, D. J. (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite
universe. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 47, 663–685.
Hu, X., Kochar, S. C., Mukerjee, H., and Samaniego, F. J. (2002). Estimation of two ordered mean residual
life functions. J. Statist. Plann. Inference, 107(1-2), 321–341. Statistical inference under inequality
constraints.
Jeong, J.-H., Jung, S.-H., and Costantino, J. P. (2008). Nonparametric inference on median residual life
function. Biometrics, 64(1), 157–163, 323–324.
Joe, H. and Proschan, F. (1984a). Comparison of two life distributions on the basis of their percentile residual
life functions. Canad. J. Statist., 12(2), 91–97.
Joe, H. and Proschan, F. (1984b). Percentile residual life functions. Oper. Res., 32(3), 668–678.
Jupp, P. E. and Mardia, K. V. (1982). A characterization of the multivariate Pareto distribution. Ann.
Statist., 10(3), 1021–1024.
Kochar, S. C., Mukerjee, H., and Samaniego, F. J. (2000). Estimation of a monotone mean residual life.
Ann. Statist., 28(3), 905–921.
Kulkarni, H. V. and Rattihalli, R. N. (2002). Nonparametric estimation of a bivariate mean residual life
function. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 97(459), 907–917.
Lillo, R. E. (2005). On the median residual lifetime and its aging properties: a characterization theorem and
applications. Naval Res. Logist., 52(4), 370–380.
Ma, C. (1996). Multivariate survival functions characterized by constant product of mean remaining lives
and hazard rates. Metrika, 44(1), 71–83.
Ma, C. (1998). Characteristic properties of multivariate survival functions in terms of residual life
imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

Hall & Wellner/Mean Residual Life

18

distributions. Metrika, 47(3), 227–240.
Ma, Y. and Yin, G. (2010). Semiparametric median residual life model and inference. Canad. J. Statist.,
38(4), 665–679.
Maguluri, G. and Zhang, C.-H. (1994). Estimation in the mean residual life regression model. J. Roy. Statist.
Soc. Ser. B , 56(3), 477–489.
Oakes, D. and Dasu, T. (1990). A note on residual life. Biometrika, 77(2), 409–410.
Oakes, D. and Dasu, T. (2003). Inference for the proportional mean residual life model. In Crossing
boundaries: statistical essays in honor of Jack Hall , volume 43 of IMS Lecture Notes Monogr. Ser., pages
105–116. Inst. Math. Statist., Beachwood, OH.
Qin, G. and Zhao, Y. (2007). Empirical likelihood inference for the mean residual life under random
censorship. Statist. Probab. Lett., 77(5), 549–557.
Robins, J. M. and Rotnitzky, A. (1992). Recovery of information and adjustment for dependent censoring
using surrogate markers. In AIDS Epidemiology, Methodological Issues, pages 297–331. Birkhauser, Boston.
Schmittlein, D. C. and Morrison, D. G. (1981). The median residual lifetime: a characterization theorem
and an application. Oper. Res., 29(2), 392–399.
Shorack, G. R. (1972). Functions of order statistics. Ann. Math. Statist., 43, 412–427.
Shorack, G. R. and Wellner, J. A. (1986). Empirical Processes with Applications to Statistics. Wiley Series
in Probability and Mathematical Statistics: Probability and Mathematical Statistics. John Wiley & Sons
Inc., New York.
Wellner, J. A. (1977). A Glivenko-Cantelli theorem and strong laws of large numbers for functions of order
statistics. Ann. Statist., 5(3), 473–480.
Wellner, J. A. (1978). Limit theorems for the ratio of the empirical distribution function to the true
distribution function. Z. Wahrsch. Verw. Gebiete, 45(1), 73–88.
Wilson, E. B. (1938). The standard deviation of sampling for life expectancy. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., 33,
705–708.
Yang, G. (1978a). Life expectancy under random censorship. Stochastic Processes Appl., 6(1), 33–39.
Yang, G. L. (1978b). Estimation of a biometric function. Ann. Statist., 6(1), 112–116.
Zhao, Y. and Qin, G. (2006). Inference for the mean residual life function via empirical likelihood. Comm.
Statist. Theory Methods, 35(4-6), 1025–1036.

imsart-generic ver. 2012/08/31 file: MRL-revived4c.tex date: July 12, 2017

