arXiv:1606.08151v1 [math.ST] 27 Jun 2016

Bernoulli 22(4), 2016, 2521–2547
DOI: 10.3150/15-BEJ736

Methods for improving estimators of
truncated circular parameters
KANIKA* and SOMESH KUMAR**
1

Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur-721302,
West Bengal, India. E-mail: * 10ma90r04@iitkgp.ac.in; ** smsh@maths.iitkgp.ernet.in

In decision theoretic estimation of parameters in Euclidean space Rp , the action space is chosen
to be the convex closure of the estimand space. In this paper, the concept has been extended
to the estimation of circular parameters of distributions having support as a circle, torus or
cylinder. As directional distributions are of curved nature, existing methods for distributions
with parameters taking values in Rp are not immediately applicable here. A circle is the simplest one-dimensional Riemannian manifold. We employ concepts of convexity, projection, etc.,
on manifolds to develop sufficient conditions for inadmissibility of estimators for circular parameters. Further invariance under a compact group of transformations is introduced in the
estimation problem and a complete class theorem for equivariant estimators is derived. This
extends the results of Moors [J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 76 (1981) 910–915] on Rp to circles. The
findings are of special interest to the case when a circular parameter is truncated. The results
are implemented to a wide range of directional distributions to obtain improved estimators of
circular parameters.
Keywords: admissibility; convexity; directional data; invariance; projection; truncated
estimation problem

1. Introduction
Problems of estimation when the parameter space is restricted are encountered often in
practice. These restrictions arise due to prior information on parameters and they can be
in the form of bounds on the range or equality/inequality constraints of several parameters. For recent developments and discussions on various aspects of estimation procedures
in restricted parameter space problems, one may refer to [14, 15, 17, 18, 28] and references therein. Frequently in practical applications, we assume the random observations
taking values in Euclidean spaces. However, it sometimes may be more useful to represent them on circles/spheres/cylinders. In such cases, we employ directional distributions.
For instance, mortality data due to a specific disease may be better represented as circular data to study the seasonal pattern of the disease. There are numerous situations

This is an electronic reprint of the original article published by the ISI/BS in Bernoulli,
2016, Vol. 22, No. 4, 2521–2547. This reprint differs from the original in pagination and
typographic detail.
1350-7265

c

2016 ISI/BS

2

Kanika and S. Kumar

in biological, meteorological, astronomical applications, where directional data (circular/axial/spherical) arises [1, 8, 19]. However, little attention has been paid to problems
of estimating directional parameters under constraints. Rueda, Fernández and Peddada
[25] considered the estimation of the circular parameters under order restrictions. There
are situations when the parameter may lie on an arc of the circle. For example, the peak
of mortality rates due to respiratory diseases occurs during November to February.
One major consequence of placing restrictions on the natural parameter space is that
estimators derived using standard concepts of maximum likelihood, minimaxity, invariance, etc., become inadmissible. However, existing methods developed for Euclidean
spaces Rp are not directly applicable to directions which are represented to lie on unit
hypersphere with the center at origin Sp−1 = {x ∈ Rp : kxk = (xT x)1/2 = 1}. Topological properties of Sp−1 depend on the differential geometry of embedding Sp−1 in Rp
as x → x/kxk with x ∈ Rp . We need to suitably modify techniques available for Rp to
improve standard estimators of directions. In this paper, we consider the case of p = 2
and denote by S a unit circle. The elements of S can be specified by corresponding angles with respect to an arbitrary choice of zero direction and orientation. Let us define
by T = [0, 2π) the space of amplitudes of the unit vectors in S. The point on S corresponding to an angle α ∈ T is (cos α, sin α)T and the angle corresponding to a point
x = (x1 , x2 )T ∈ S is atan(x2 /x1 ), where the function atan(·) is given in (2.2). Note that
S and T are isomorphic.
Let random variable Z ∈ Z have an unknown probability distribution Pν , ν ∈ Ω. Let
the family {Pν , ν ∈ Ω} be dominated by a measure η. The support Z may be circle T,
torus Tk or cylinder R × T, etc.; however, the estimand h(ν) is circular, where h(·) is a
measurable function from Ω into T. The problem of estimating h(ν) is considered under
a circular loss function:
L(ν, δ) = 1 − cos(h(ν) − δ).

(1.1)

In the case when the parameter space is a subspace of Rp and the loss function is an
increasing function of Euclidean distance, the action space is chosen as a convex closure
of the range of estimand. Unlike this well-known result, it is demonstrated in Section 3
that analogous result does not necessarily hold for circular parameter h(ν) under the
loss L.
One of the major contributions was of Moors [22] (see [21], Chapter 3, also) to the
estimation problem of truncated parameters of a unknown family of distributions on Rp
dominated by a σ-finite measure. Estimators (except the constant ones) taking value near
the boundaries of action space with the positive probability turn out to be inadmissible
with respect to the squared loss function under certain conditions on the transformation
group. He considered invariance under a finite group with measure preserving elements
such that induced transformations of the action space satisfy the linearity property and
group of these transformations is commutative. Under this scenario, he constructed a
subspace of the original action space and proved that any invariant estimator taking
values outside this new action space with the positive probability is inadmissible and
dominated by its projection on the new action space. Later, Moors and van Houwelingen

Truncated circular parameters

3

[23] relaxed conditions of measure preserving and commutativity. Without dropping these
conditions, Kumar and Sharma [16] generalized the result of Moors [22] to a locally
compact group such that induced transformations on the action space are affine (stronger
condition than linear property) and loss function is an increasing function of Euclidean
distance. Along with these ideas, an analogous theory for circular parameter h(ν) is
developed in Section 4.
The outline of the paper is as follows. The concepts of distance formulae, convexity,
closure of a set and projections play a prominent role here. Section 2 provides the mathematical background of these concepts for T. In Section 3, we consider the estimation
of circular parameter h(ν) when it is restricted to lie on an arc of circle and estimation
space A is chosen as the convex closure of h(Ω). A complete class result for this estimation problem is obtained under certain conditions. Then the result is illustrated for
several directional distributions. In Section 4, we introduce invariance under a compact
group G in the estimation problem such that induced transformations on A satisfy the
circular property. Sufficient condition for inadmissibility of an G-equivariant estimator is
obtained. Applications of this result are demonstrated for both unrestricted or restricted
estimation problems. For restricted estimation problems, improved estimators obtained
in Section 3 are further improved using the result of Section 4.

2. Definitions and preliminary results
Before we embark on estimation problem, we introduce some preliminary results in this
section. For a subset A ⊂ T, Lebesgue measure, interior, convex hull, convex closure and
boundary of A are denoted by l(A), int(A), conv(A), cc(A) and bd(A), respectively.

2.1. Convexity
It is more convenient to deal with polar coordinates than Cartesian coordinates when
observations lie on a unit circle. We summarize the concept of convexity for the circle S
and then adopt it for the space T.
A geodesic ([27], page 15), on Riemannian manifold generalizes the line in Euclidean
space. In the context of Riemannian manifold M equipped with Riemannian metric, a
subset A ⊂ M is convex if minimal geodesic with the end points in A belongs to A. In the
case of S, great circles are geodesics. Minimal geodesic between any two points on S is
unique unless points are antipodal (diametrically opposite). Some concepts of convexity
on S were introduced in [4], Section 9.1. Here, we use convexity and strong convexity as
given below.
Definition 2.1 (Convex). A set A ⊂ S is convex if for any two points in A, there
exists a minor arc of great circle lying entirely in A joining them.
By convention, this definition allows antipodal points to lie in convex sets. Every
segment of a semicircle is a convex subset of S.

4

Kanika and S. Kumar

Definition 2.2 (Strongly convex). A subset A of S is strongly convex if A is convex
and does not contain antipodal points.
In the case of Rp , convex hull of any subset is the collection of all possible weighted
arithmetic mean of points in that subset. Analogously for a set A ⊂ S, the convex hull
of A is the smallest convex set (not necessarily strong convex) containing A, that is, it
consists of
(w1 x1 + · · · + wn xn )/kw1 x1 + · · · + wn xn k

(2.1)

Pn
for all nonnegative weights w1 , . . . , wn such that i=1 wi = 1 and for all x1 , . . . , xn ∈ A
provided the norm in the denominator is nonzero. The convex hull of two antipodal points
of S does not exist ([3], Section 2.3). Polar form of (2.1) is discussed in Section 2.2.
Extension of a fundamental theorem of Carathéodory for R2 to S can be stated as
below (see [3]).
Lemma 2.1. Each point in the convex hull of a set A ⊂ S can be expressed as normalized
weighted arithmetic mean of at most 2 points of A.
To extend definitions of convex and strong convex sets to the space T, we need certain
subsets of T. For α, β ∈ T, definitions for sets of type I, J , K and K1 are stated only for
intervals of form (α, β). They may be extended to intervals of other forms (α, β], [α, β)
and [α, β]. For α ≤ β, let
I(α, β) = (α, β),
J(α, β) = [0, α) ∪ (β, 2π),

 I(α, β),
K(α, β) = I(α, β) or J(α, β),

J(α, β),

if 0 ≤ (β − α) < π;
if (β − α) = π;
if π < (β − α) < 2π.

Sets I[α, β] and J[α, β] contain all the angles corresponding to an arc joining two points
(cos α, sin α)T and (cos β, sin β)T in the positive and the negative directions, respectively.
Moreover, K[α, β] contains angles corresponding to the minor arc joining them.
Remark 2.1. Although in definition of I-type set, β is not allowed to take value 2π,
intervals (α, 2π) and [α, 2π) can be expressed as J(0, α) and J(0, α], respectively, for all
α ∈ T. For any α ∈ T, J(α, α) = T − {α} and J(α, α] = J[α, α) = J[α, α] = T.
For defining sets of type I, J and K, we have taken α ≤ β. The following definition
for K1 -type subsets of T does not have this restriction.

K(α, β),
if α ≤ β,
K1 (α, β) =
K(β, α),
if α > β.

Truncated circular parameters

5

Note that set K(α, β) is isomorphic to I(0, γ) with γ ∈ [0, π]. For 0 ≤ (β − α) ≤ π and
π < (β − α) < 2π, K(α, β) can be transformed to I(0, β − α) and I(0, 2π − β + α) using
rotation by angles 2π − α and 2π − β, respectively. Extending this argument, we have
the following result.
Lemma 2.2. Sets K1 (α, β), K1 (α, β], K1 [α, β) and K1 [α, β] with α, β ∈ T are isomorphic
to I(0, γ), I(0, γ], I[0, γ) and I[0, γ], respectively, with 0 ≤ γ ≤ π.
For studying topological properties, we consider the metric space (T, d) with the following definition of metric:
d(α, β) = 1 − cos(α − β),
α, β ∈ T.
√
Here, 2d simply returns lengths of chord between points (cos α, sin α)T and (cos β, sin β)T ,
respectively. Consider the following classes of subsets of T:
C1 = {T} ∪ {K1 (α, β), K1 (α, β], K1 [α, β), K1 [α, β] : α, β, ∈ T},
C2 = {K1 (α, β), K1 (α, β], K1 [α, β) : α, β ∈ T} ∪ {K1 [α1 , β1 ] : α1 , β1 ∈ T and |α1 − β1 | 6= π},
C3 = C1 − C2 = {T} ∪ {K1 [α, β] : α, β, ∈ T and |α − β| = π},
C4 = {∅, T} ∪ {I[α, β], J[α, β] : α, β, ∈ T and α ≤ β},
C5 = C1 ∩ C4 = {∅, T} ∪ {K1 [α, β] : α, β ∈ T and α ≤ β}.
Remark 2.2. Classes C1 , C2 and C5 consist of all convex, strongly convex and closed
convex subsets of T, respectively. Elements of C3 and C4 are closed subsets of T. Moreover,
sets belonging to C3 (except T) and C4 are corresponding to any minor arc and any arc
on the unit circle, respectively.

2.2. Circular mean direction
Since the arithmetic mean is not a suitable measure of central tendency for the angular
data, the circular mean direction is used ([12], page 13). The weighted circular mean
direction of the observations
φ1 , . . . , φn belonging to T with weights w1 , . . . , wn , wi ≥ 0
P
(i = 1, . . . , n) such that ni=1 wi = 1 is defined as

 Pn
i=1 wi sin φi
P
,
φ̄w = atan
n
i=1 wi cos φi
with the following definition of atan(·)

−1
 tan (s/c),

  

π
+
tan−1 (s/c),
s
atan
= π/2,

c
−1


 2π + tan (s/c),
not defined,

if
if
if
if
if

c > 0, s ≥ 0;
c < 0;
c = 0, s > 0;
c ≥ 0, s < 0;
s = 0, c = 0,

(2.2)

6

Kanika and S. Kumar

where tan−1 (·) is the standard inverse tangent function taking values in (−π/2, π/2).
The definition of atan(·) function ensures the following property.
Lemma 2.3. For all φ ∈ T and a ∈ R, we have


tan φ + a
atan
= {φ + tan−1 (a)} mod (2π).
1 − a tan φ
Note that φ̄w is polar form of (2.1) if φi is corresponding angle to xi ∈ S for all
i = 1, . . . , n. The following proposition proves that convex combination (weighted circular
mean direction) of finite collection of the points in convex subset of T is again in that
subset.
PropositionP2.1. Let A ∈ C1 (convex), φ1 , . . . , φn ∈ A and w1 , . . . , wn be nonnegative
weights with ni=1 wi = 1. Then weighted circular mean direction φ̄w of these observations
belongs to A, if it is defined.
Circular mean direction of a circular random variable θ is defined as
CE(θ) = atan(E sin θ/E cos θ).
An elementary result given in [7], page 74, states that if random variable X lies in convex
subset of Rp with probability one, E(X) lies in the same subset. An analogous result for
T is given below.
Proposition 2.2. If A ∈ C1 (convex) and θ is a random angle such that Pr(θ ∈ A) = 1,
the mean direction CE(θ) ∈ A if CE(θ) exists. Furthermore, if A ∈ C2 (strongly convex),
CE(θ) always exists. If A ∈ C3 (convex but not strongly), CE(θ) does not necessarily exist.

2.3. Projection
The concept of projection in Rp is adopted to define projections of angles in T.
Definition 2.3. The projection of an angle φ ∈ T on a nonempty set A ∈ C4 (closed) is
defined to be the unique point φ0 ∈ A such that
d(φ, φ0 ) = inf d(φ, ψ).
ψ∈A

The case when A = T is trivial. For α, β ∈ T, let γ = (α + β)/2. If A is of from I[α, β],
φ0 is given by


if φ ∈ I[α, β];
if φ ∈ I[α, β];
 φ,
 φ,
φ0 = α,
if φ ∈ K1 (α, π + γ];
or
α,
if φ ∈ K1 (α, π + γ);


β,
if φ ∈ K1 (β, π + γ);
β,
if φ ∈ K1 (β, π + γ].

Truncated circular parameters

7

Note that the two definitions are equivalent except when φ = π + γ. For φ = π + γ, first
and second ones yield φ0 = α and φ0 = β, respectively. This is so because d(α, π + γ) =
d(β, π + γ). If A is the form of J[α, β], φ0 is given by

 φ,
φ0 = α,

β,

if φ ∈ J[α, β];
if φ ∈ I(α, γ];
if φ ∈ I(γ, β);

or


 φ,
α,

β,

if φ ∈ J[α, β];
if φ ∈ I(α, γ);
if φ ∈ I[γ, β).

Once again the two definitions are equivalent except when φ = γ.
Let A be a closed convex subset of Rp and x ∈ Rp . The projection x0 of x ∈
/ A on A
satisfies
kx0 − yk < kx − yk

for all y ∈ A.

An analogous statement holds only for specific closed convex subsets of T. The following
result can be easily proved using geometrical arguments.
Lemma 2.4. Let φ0 be the projection of an angle φ ∈
/ A on a set A ∈ C5 (closed convex).
The inequality
d(φ0 , ψ) < d(φ, ψ)

for all ψ ∈ A

holds iff A = I[α, β] with β < α + (2/3)π or A = J[α, β] with β > α + (4/3)π, that is,
l(A) < (2/3)π. Moreover, if l(A) = (2/3)π and bd(A) = {b1 , b2 }, the above inequality
remains strict for ψ ∈ int(A) and at least one of ψ = bi (i = 1, 2).
For remaining sets in C5 , the above result holds for the expected values under certain
conditions on the distribution of random variable θ (Lemma 2.5).
If the distribution of a circular random variable θ is symmetric about ψ, the density of θ
with respect to any measure (measure is always finite as T is a compact space) would be a
function of cos(θ − ψ). Further, if this distribution is unimodal, mean direction and mode
coincide. Let us denote by f (θ|ψ) = f (cos(θ − ψ)) the density of a symmetric unimodal
distribution with mode ψ. Now consider the mixture of two unimodals f (·|ψ) and f (·|ψ +
π). This mixture would necessarily not be bimodal. Let θ have a mixture distribution with
probability density εf (θ|ψ) + (1 − ε)f (θ|ψ + π), ε ∈ [0, 1]. For this mixture distribution,
define
ζ(t) = f ′ (t)/f ′ (−t),

t ∈ [−1, 1]

(2.3)

with t = cos(θ − ψ). Maxima and minima of ζ(t) are denoted by ζmax and ζmin , respectively. Distribution of θ would be unimodal with modes ψ and ψ + π for ε ∈
[{1 + ζmin }−1 , 1] and ε ∈ [0, {1 + ζmax }−1 ], respectively. For remaining values of ε, it
would be bimodal.

8

Kanika and S. Kumar

Lemma 2.5. Suppose that θ is a continuous circular random variable whose distribution
is symmetric about one of its mode ψ, where ψ belongs to A ∈ C5 (closed convex) with
l(A) ∈ (2π/3, π] such that Pr(θ ∈
/ A) > 0. Let θ0 be the projection of θ on A. Then
Eθψ {d(θ0 , ψ)} < Eθψ {d(θ, ψ)}
if distribution of θ satisfies one of the following conditions:
(C1) distribution is unimodal with mode ψ;
(C2) distribution is mixture with probability density εf (·|ψ) + (1 − ε)f (·|ψ + π), where
ε ≥ 1/2 and ζ(·) defined in (2.3) is an increasing function.
It may be noted that the condition (C2) implies (C1) for ε ∈ [{1 + ζ(−1)}−1 , 1].
Remark 2.3. Convexity of density function f (t) in t ∈ [−1, 1] yields increasing nature
of the function ζ(t).

3. Improving estimators in restricted parameter
spaces
In Euclidean spaces, the action space is chosen as a convex closure of the estimand space
since estimators outside this space with the positive probability are dominated by their
projections on it. An analogous result stated below for estimating the circular parameter
h(ν) is an immediate consequence of Lemmas 2.4 and 2.5.
Theorem 3.1. Let estimand be h(ν) ∈ Ω1 = h(Ω) ⊂ T and the loss function be L defined in (1.1). Denote the estimation space by A = cc(Ω1 ). Any estimator δ(Z) satisfying
Prν (δ(Z) ∈
/ A) > 0 for some ν ∈ Ω is inadmissible and dominated by the projection of
δ(Z) on A if either of the following conditions holds:
(C3) l(A) ≤ (2/3)π;
(C4) distribution of δ(Z) is symmetric about h(ν) and with respect to Lebesgue measure, it satisfies one of the conditions (C1) and (C2) with ψ = h(ν).
For the sake of clarity, the estimation space A can be called the action space only when
its Lebesgue measure is less than or equal to 2π/3.
Remark 3.1. Note that when estimand h(ν) is forced to lie on an arc of semicircle, A is
strictly a subset of T. If h(ν) does not take value on a semicircle, A = T ([3], Theorem 7).
Conditions given in Theorem 3.1 for the inadmissibility of an estimator are sufficient
but not necessary. Suppose that θ has a mixture distribution which is generated from
distributions CN(ν, κ) and CN(ν + π, κ) with probabilities ε and (1 − ε), respectively,
where ν ∈ [0, π], ε = 0.1 and κ = 1. Based on the random sample of size n = 10, risk

Truncated circular parameters

9

Figure 1. Risk plot (a) θ̄ (straight line) and (b) projection of θ̄ on [0, π] (dotted line) under
the loss L.

functions of the sample mean direction θ̄ (straight line) and the projection of θ̄ on [0, π]
(dotted line) under the loss L are plotted in Figure 1. Density of CN distribution and θ̄
are defined in the next subsection. It can be seen that for end points of ν ∈ [0, π], θ̄ is not
improved by its projection. This demonstration refutes the result stated in Theorem 3.1
for an arbitrary estimator in case l(A) > (2/3)π.
If an estimator δ(Z) has a distribution with mixture probability density εf (δ(z)|h(ν))+
(1 − ε)f (δ(z)|h(ν) + π), its mean direction is given by

if ε < 1/2;
 h(ν) + π,
CE(δ(Z)) = undefined,
if ε = 1/2;

h(ν),
if ε > 1/2.

Therefore, when ε < 1/2, δ(Z) can be treated as an estimator for h(ν) + π.
Although Theorem 3.1 is based on a condition (C4) satisfied by the distribution of
an estimator when l(A) > (2/3)π, examining the distribution of the estimator can be a
complex exercise. We try to simplify these conditions for specific cases.
Consider the problem of estimating the location parameter ν ∈ T of a circular random
variable θ under the loss L which is invariant under a rotation group
G1 = {gα : gα (θ) = (θ + α) mod (2π)}.

(3.1)

Under L, an G1 -equivariant estimator for ν based on a random sample θ1 , . . . , θn satisfies
δ(θ1 , . . . , θn ) = θ1 + ξ(θ2 − θ1 , . . . , θn − θ1 ),
where ξ is an arbitrary statistic whose distribution is free from ν. This indicates that
distribution of an G1 -equivariant estimator is of the same nature as θ. Using this fact,
we deduce the following result from Theorem 3.1.
Corollary 3.1. If θ is a continuous circular random variable whose distribution is symmetric about ν ∈ Ω1 and satisfies one of the conditions (C1) and (C2) with ψ = ν such

10

Kanika and S. Kumar

that A = cc(Ω1 ) is K1 -type, that is, l(A) ≤ π, any G1 -equivariant estimator δ(θ) lying
outside A with the positive probability is inadmissible and dominated by its projection on
A under loss L.
A similar result can be extended to the torus Tk = T × · · ·× T. A distribution on Tk can
be specified as that of k circular random variables, that is, k-tuple vector Z = (θ1 , . . . , θk )
taking values on Z ⊂ Tk . Suppose that all k components are independently distributed
and each component has a common location parameter ν. This estimation problem is
invariant under a group G2 given by
G2 = {gα = (g1α , . . . , gkα ) : giα (θi ) = (θi + α) mod (2π)}.

(3.2)

Problem of estimating ν can also be thought as multisample problem of estimating common ν. Therefore, we can also draw random samples of different sizes from different
components of Z as components are independently distributed. As in Corollary 3.1, we
deduce the following result from Theorem 3.1.
Corollary 3.2. Let all components of a random variable Z = (θ1 , . . . , θk ) taking value
on Tk be independently distributed. If each component has a common location parameter
ν ∈ Ω1 and satisfies with respect to Lebesgue measure one of the conditions (C1) and
(C2) with ψ = ν, any G2 -equivariant estimator δ(z) lying outside A = cc(Ω1 ) with the
positive probability is inadmissible and dominated by its projection on A under loss L
when l(A) ≤ π.
Corollaries 3.1 and 3.2 enable us to improve various estimators available in the literature for the circular location ν of several directional distributions. Apart from the
maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) δml , the following estimators for ν have been proposed on the basis of a random sample θ1 , . . . , θn .
Pn
(E1) (Watson [29], page 135) Sample
direction θ̄ minimizes i=1 d(θi , α) over
Pn mean P
n
α ∈ T and is obtained as θ̄ = atan( i=1 sin θi / i=1 cos θi ).
P
(E2) (Mardia and Jupp [19], page 167) Circular median δcm minimizes ni=1 d1 (θi , α)
over α ∈ T, where d1 (α, β) = π − |π − |α − β|| for α, β ∈ T. P
n
(E3) (He and Simpson [10]) L1 -estimator δl1 minimizes i=1 {d(θi , α)}1/2 over α ∈ T.
(E4) (Ducharme and Milasevic [5]) Normalized spatial median δnsm = (α∗2 /α∗1 ), where
(α∗1 , α∗2 ) is the solution of
min

(α1 ,α2 )∈R

n
X
1/2
{1 + α21 + α22 − 2(α1 cos θi + α2 sin θi )} .
2
i=1

(Neeman and Chang [24], Tsai [26]) Circular Wilcoxon estimator δcw minimizes
P(E5)
n
R
i=1 i d1 (θi , α) over α ∈ T, where Ri (i = 1, . . . , n) is the rank of sin(θi − α) amongst
sin(θ1 − α), . . . , sin(θn − α).
Except δcm , all other estimators are proposed in their Cartesian forms. All the above
mentioned estimators are either M -estimator or restricted M -estimator or R-estimator.

Truncated circular parameters

11

Remark 3.2. Due to lack of preference for the zero direction and orientation in
the definition of T, rotation-equivariant estimators for circular parameters are preferred. All the above-mentioned estimators enjoy the property of G1 -equivariance
when support is T. When support is Tk , these estimators based on sample values
θ11 , . . . , θ1n1 , . . . , θk1 , . . . , θknk are also G2 -equivariant. This equivariance property is used
in the following section to derive improved estimators.

3.1. Applications of Theorem 3.1
Theorem 3.1 is applicable to a wide variety of estimation problems for directional distributions. In this section, we consider various examples where Theorem 3.1 leads to
improvement over traditional estimators.
Example 3.1 (Unimodal distributions on circle T). A circular normal distribution
CN(ν, κ) is defined by the following density:
f2 (θ; ν, κ) =

1
eκ cos(θ−ν) ,
2πI0 (κ)

θ, ν ∈ T, κ > 0,

where Iv is the modified Bessel function of the first kind and order v. It is known a priori
that ν ∈ Ω1 such that Ω1 is an arc of the circle. Without loss of generality, we can assume
that Ω1 = [0, b], where b ∈ T. The estimation space for ν is
A=



[0, b],
T,

if b ≤ π;
if b > π.

The unrestricted MLE of ν is δml = θ̄. The circular normal distribution is the only rotationally symmetric distribution for which MLE of the mean direction ν is the sample
mean direction θ̄. Maximization of likelihood function over Ω1 yields the restricted MLE
δrml as


if θ̄ ∈ [0, b];
if θ̄ ∈ [0, b];
 θ̄,
 θ̄,
δrml = b,
or
(3.3)
if θ̄ ∈ (b, π + b/2);
b,
if θ̄ ∈ (b, π + b/2];


0,
if θ̄ ∈ [π + b/2, 2π);
0,
if θ̄ ∈ (π + b/2, 2π).

At θ̄ = π + b/2, δrml can take two values. Since Pr(θ̄ = π + b/2) = 0, both estimators are
equivalent. Note that when b ≤ π, δrml is also the projection of θ̄ on A. Corollary 3.1
yields that δrml improves θ̄ under the loss L when b ≤ π. When b > π, the projection of θ̄
on A is the same as θ̄. In a similar way, improvements over all other estimators, δcm , δl1 ,
δnsm and δcw (as defined in (E2), (E3), (E4), (E5)) can be obtained from Corollary 3.1
and Remark 3.2 for ν when ν is restricted to [0, b] and b ≤ π.
Other well-known symmetric unimodal distributions are wrapped Cauchy WC(ν, ρ),
wrapped normal WN(ν, ρ) and cardioid C(ν, ρ) with the following probability densities

12

Kanika and S. Kumar

in terms of t = cos(θ − ν),
f3 (t) =

(1 − ρ2 )
,
(1 + ρ2 − 2ρt)

ρ ∈ (0, 1);

∞

f4 (t) =

1 X i2
1
ρ Ti (t),
+
2π π i=1

f5 (t) = (2π)−1 + π −1 ρt,

ρ ∈ (0, 1);
|ρ| < 1/2,

respectively, where Tv is a Chebyshev polynomial of first kind of order v. Jones and
Pewsey [13] proposed a family of symmetric unimodal distributions on T whose densities
are provided in terms of t as
f6 (t) =

{cosh(κψ)}1/ψ
1/ψ
{1 + tanh(κψ)t} ,
2πP1/ψ (cosh(κψ))

κ > 0, ψ ∈ R,

where Pv is the associated Legendre function of the first kind of degree v and order
0. Here, we exclude the case of κ = 0 since it yields the uniform distribution on T.
Circular normal, wrapped Cauchy and cardioid distributions are contained in this family
corresponding to ψ = 0, −1 and 1, respectively.
Another general family of symmetric unimodal distributions on T contains wrapped
α-stable distributions with densities of the following form in terms of t ([19], page 52)
∞

f7 (t) =

1
1 X iα
ρ Ti (t),
+
2π π i=1

ρ ∈ (0, 1), α = (0, 1) ∪ (1, 2].

For α = 2, it yields wrapped normal distribution.
Since the distributions corresponding to densities f6 and f7 satisfy condition (C1) ,
Corollary 3.1 and Remark 3.2 yield improvements over all estimators θ̄, δml , δcm , δl1 ,
δnsm and δcw for the mean direction ν when ν is restricted to [0, b] such that b ≤ π.
Example 3.2 (Mixture distributions on T). Let random variable θ be generated
from CN(ν, κ) and CN(ν + π, κ) with probabilities ε and (1 − ε), respectively. For this
distribution, ζ(t) = e2κt which is increasing in t. Thus, Corollary 3.1 and Remark 3.2
yield that all the estimators, θ̄, δml , δcm , δl1 , δnsm and δcw , for ν ∈ Ω1 are improved by
their projections on A if l(A) ≤ π and ε ≥ 1/2. For the values of ε < 1/2, improvements
are possible when l(A) ≤ (2/3)π.
Similar improvements are possible when we mix either two wrapped normal or two
distributions with density f6 for same value of ψ ≤ 1 with different mean directions ν
and ν + π. To apply Corollary 3.1, we must show that the corresponding function ζ(t) is
an increasing function in t. For a general density f6 (t), derivative of ζ(t) with respect to
t is obtained as
1/ψ

2(1 − ψ)
tanh(κψ)
1 + tanh(κψ)t
ζ ′ (t) =
,
ψ 6= 0,
ψ
{1 + tanh(κψ)t}2 1 − tanh(κψ)t

Truncated circular parameters

13

which is always nonnegative unless ψ > 1.
The wrapped normal distribution can be represented by theta function ϑ3 . Using the
representation of ϑ3 in terms of infinite products ([9], page 921, equation 8.181.2), we
have
∞

1 Y
f4 (t) =
(1 − ρ2i )(1 + 2tρ2i−1 + ρ2(i−1) ).
2π i=1
P
Second derivative of f4 (t) with respect to t is f4 (t) i6=j ξi (t)ξj (t), where ξ(i) =
2ρ2i−1 /{1 + 2tρ2i−1 + ρ2(i−1) }−1 . Convexity of f4 (t) follows from the positiveness of
ξi (t) and increasing nature of ζ(t) follows from the convexity of f4 (t) using Remark 2.3.
Example 3.3 (Distributions on T with k-fold rotational symmetry). This distribution is constructed by putting k copies of the original distribution end-to-end ([19],
page 53). If we are given a distribution of θ which is unimodal and symmetric about
ν, constructed distribution has the density f (cos(k(θ − ν0 ))), θ ∈ T, ν0 ∈ [0, 2π/k). Note
that new distribution is k-modal, for example, k-modal circular normal distribution ([12],
page 209). For k ≥ 3, condition (C3) of Theorem 3.1 is satisfied and so estimators of ν0
lying outside A with a positive probability can be improved by their projections on A.
Note that the results hold when the parameter space is full, that is, [0, 2π/k) or restricted,
that is, a subset of [0, 2π/k). For k = 2, the result holds only for restricted parameter
space if ν0 ∈ Ω1 ⊂ [0, b] such that b ≤ (2/3)π.
Example 3.4 (Distributions on torus Tk ). Suppose that all k components of
Z = (θ1 , . . . , θk ) ∈ Z ⊂ Tk are independently distributed and ith component θi follows
CN(ν, κi ) with known κi . Consider the estimation of common ν ∈ Ω1 under the loss L.
1, . . . , n). Suppose
Let (θi1 , . . . , θini ) be a random sample from the ithPpopulation (i = P
ni
ni
θ̄i denotes the sample mean direction and Ri = {( j=1
sin θij )2 + ( j=1
cos θij )2 }1/2
denotes the sample resultant length for the sample of ith component. The MLE of ν is

 Pk
i=1 κi Ri sin θ̄i
.
(3.4)
θ̃ = atan Pk
i=1 κi Ri cos θ̄i
The conditional distribution of θ̃ is again circular normal CN(ν, R∗ ), where
∗

R =

(

k
X
i=1

κi Ri sin θ̄i

!2

+

k
X
i=1

κi Ri cos θ̄i

!2 )1/2

Holmquist [11].

Since the distribution of R∗ is dependent only on κi , distribution of θ̃ is unimodal and
symmetric about its mode ν. Corollary 3.2 yields that θ̃ is dominated by its projection
on A under the loss L if l(A) ≤ π. Note that improved estimator of θ̃ is also the restricted
MLE for common ν when l(A) ≤ π.
Using Corollary 3.2 and Remark 3.2, we can obtain improvements over other estimators
θ̄, δcm , δl1 , δnsm and δcw based on random sample θ11 , . . . , θ1n1 , . . . , θk1 , . . . , θknk .

14

Kanika and S. Kumar

Remark 3.3. This model can be further extended to the cases where distributions of
independent components are not necessarily the same and satisfy conditions (C1) and
(C2) with respect to Lebesgue measure, namely, distributions considered in Examples 3.1
and 3.2.
Example 3.5 (Distribution on unit sphere S2 ). Point x = (x1 , x2 , x3 )T ∈ S2 can be
specified by its geographical coordinates: colatitude θ = cos−1 (x3 ) ∈ [0, π] and longitude
φ = atan(x2 /x1 ) ∈ [0, 2π). Hence, sphere S2 is isomorphic to T2 = [0, π] × [0, 2π). The
density of Fisher distribution on the support T2 is given by
f8 (θ, φ; ν1 , ν2 , κ) =

κ sin θ
exp{κ(sin θ sin ν1 cos(φ − ν2 ) + cos θ cos ν1 )},
4π sinh(κ)
(ν1 , ν2 ) ∈ T2 , κ > 0,

where (ν1 , ν2 ) is the mean direction. On the basis of a random sample of size n, the MLE
of ν2 , when κ is known/unknown and ν1 is unknown, is given by

 Pn
i=1 sin θi sin φi
P
.
δml = atan
n
i=1 sin θi cos φi

It is known that mean direction is restricted to a continuous arc of hemisphere. Without
loss of generality, we can assume that ν1 ∈ [0, π] and ν2 ∈ [0, b] with b ≤ π. We can improve
the MLE of ν2 by its projection on [0, b] if b ≤ (2/3)π using Theorem 3.1.
Example 3.6 (Distribution on cylinder R × T). Mardia and Sutton [20] proposed a
distribution on the cylinder R × T. Let (X, θ) have the support R × T where the marginal
distribution of θ is CN(ν0 , κ), ν0 ∈ T, κ > 0 and conditional distribution of X|θ is a normal
with mean
√
µc = µ + σρ κ{cos(θ − ν) − cos(ν0 − ν)},
µ ∈ R, ν ∈ T, 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1, σ > 0
and variance σ 2 (1 − ρ2 ). Based on a random sample of size n, the MLE of ν is


s2 r23 r12 − r13
,
δml = atan
s3 r23 r13 − r12
P
where for i = 1, 2, 3 and j = 1, . . . , n, x1j = xj , x2j = cos θj , x3j = sin θj , x̄i = j xij /n,
P
s2i = j (xij − x̄i )2 ; and for i 6= k (i, k = 1, 2, 3),
rik =

1 X
(xij − x̄i )(xkj − x̄k ).
si sk j

If ν is restricted to Ω1 such that l(A) ≤ (2/3)π, δml is dominated by its projection on
A under the loss L using Theorem 3.1. Note that simulations indicate that this result is
also valid for (2/3)π < l(A) ≤ π.

Truncated circular parameters

15

4. An inadmissibility result for general equivariant
rules
Moors [21, 22], Kumar and Sharma [16] gave a general method for obtaining improved
equivariant estimators of parameters in Euclidean spaces. In this section, we extend these
results for estimating circular parameters.
Let the problem of estimating h(ν) ∈ Ω1 under the loss L be invariant under a compact
group G of measurable transformations g : Z → Z. There exists a finite and left (right)
invariant Haar measure λ on G ([6], Theorem 1.5). Let Ḡ and G̃ be the groups induced
by G on parameter space Ω and estimation space A = cc(Ω1 ).
Lemma 4.1. For the G-invariant estimation problem defined above, we have:

(i) f (z|ḡ(ν)) = f (g−1 (z)|ν) a.e. with respect to measure η;
(ii) hḡ(ν) = g̃h(ν) mod (2π) for all ν ∈ Ω;
(iii) Let A ∈ C5 (closed convex). If φ0 is the projection of φ ∈ T on A, the projection
of g̃(φ) on g̃(A) is g̃(φ0 ).
For each z ∈ Z and ν ∈ Ω, define a probability measure on G as
f (z|ḡ(ν))
.
∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ )
f
(z|ḡ
G

τ (z|ḡ(ν)) = R

With the help of these measures, for a fixed z ∈ Z, define a function hz : Ω → A as


R
Z
sin(g̃h(ν))τ (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g)

G

R

f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) > 0;
,
if
atan

G
G cos(g̃h(ν))τ (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g)
hz (ν) =
(4.1)
Z


 h(ν),
f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) = 0.
if

G

The new estimation space Az is defined as a convex closure of hz (Ω), that is, Az =
cc(hz (Ω)).
Remark 4.1. In case of
hz (ν) can be written as

R

G

f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) = 0, Az = A. When


E sin(g̃h(ν))
hz (ν) = atan
,
E cos(g̃h(ν))

R

G

f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) > 0,

(4.2)

where the expectation is taken over g with respect to a probability measure τ (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g).
If Pr(g̃h(ν) ∈ A) = 1, hz (ν) ∈ A from the convexity of A (see Proposition 2.2). Since Az
is the smallest convex set containing hz (ν), we conclude that Az ⊂ A.
We assume that every transformation g̃ ∈ G̃ satisfies circular property, that is, for a
fixed α and for all φ ∈ A, g̃(φ) is either α + φ or α − φ such that images are in A itself.

16

Kanika and S. Kumar

Lemma 4.2. If every induced transformation on A satisfies the circular property, the
reduced estimation space Az satisfies Ag(z) = g̃(Az ) for all z ∈ Z and g ∈ G.
Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2 are utilized to prove the main result of this section.
Theorem 4.1. Consider an G-invariant estimation problem under the loss function L
with a compact group G such that elements of induced group G̃ on the estimation space A
satisfy the circular property. Any G-equivariant estimator δ satisfying Prν (δ(Z) ∈
/ AZ ) >
0 for some ν ∈ Ω is dominated by its projection on AZ provided that l(AZ ) ≤ (2/3)π.
This result is applicable to both restricted and unrestricted estimation problems as
illustrated in the following subsection.

4.1. Applications of Theorem 4.1
We consider estimation of the location parameter ν ∈ Ω1 of a circular random variable
θ under the loss L. Let us denote by fν (θ) the density of θ that would be a function of
cos(θ − ν).
4.1.1. Unrestricted estimation problems
The estimation problem is invariant under the rotation group G1 . Clearly, the induced
group G̃1 on the estimation space A = T is itself G1 and every transformation in G1
satisfies the circular property. Taking G = G1 , we define

 R 2π

 R 2π
sin αfα (θ) dα
sin(α + ν)fα+ν (θ) dα
= atan R 02π
,
hθ (ν) = atan R 02π
cos(α
+
ν)f
(θ)
dα
cos
αf
(θ)
dα
α+ν
α
0
0

or equivalently, hθ (ν) is constant on ν ∈ T. Therefore the following result follows from
Theorem 4.1.
Corollary 4.1. If θ is a circular random variable with the unrestricted location parameter ν ∈ T, there is only one admissible G1 -equivariant estimator under the loss L which
is obtained as

 R 2π
sin αfα (θ) dα
,
δad = atan R 02π
cos αfα (θ) dα
0
where fν (θ) the density of θ.

For CN(ν, κ) distribution, δad = θ̄. All other G1 -equivariant estimators δcm , δl1 , δnsm
and δcw for ν ∈ T under the loss L are improved by θ̄ using Corollary 4.1. This result is
significant in the sense that so far comparison of θ̄ with δcm , δl1 , δnsm and δcw was done
only with respect to asymptotic efficiency and robustness.

Truncated circular parameters

17

4.1.2. Restricted estimation problems
Let the location ν be restricted to any arc of semicircle. Without loss of generality, we
can assume that ν ∈ Ω1 = [0, b] with 0 < b ≤ π. In Example 3.1, the same restricted space
estimation problem was considered and we obtained improvements over estimators θ̄,
∗
∗
∗
∗
δml , δcm , δl1 , δnsm and δcw for various distributions. Denote by θ̄∗ , δml
, δcm
, δl1
, δnsm
and
∗
δcw , the dominating estimators of θ̄, δml , δcm , δl1 , δnsm and δcw as their projections on
Ω1 = [0, b]. Here, we can further improve upon these improved estimators.
We consider the transformation group as G3 = {e, g} where g(θ) = (b − θ) mod (2π)
and e is the identity transformation. The estimation problem remains invariant under G3
and the induced group on the estimation space A is G3 . Clearly, elements of G3 satisfy
the circular property. Define the following function for a fixed random sample θ1 , . . . , θn
as
h(θ1 ,...,θn ) (ν) = {b/2 + tan−1 (a(ν))} mod (2π),
where after some algebraic computations, a(ν) is derived as
Qn
Qn


b
i=1 fb−ν (θi ) − Qi=1 fν (θi )
Q
−ν .
tan
a(ν) = n
n
2
i=1 fb−ν (θi ) +
i=1 fν (θi )

Since fν (θ) is a function of cos(θ − ν), h(θ1 ,...,θn ) (ν) is symmetric about ν = b/2. It is
sufficient to assume that ν ∈ [0, b/2] to study the behaviour of the function h(θ1 ,...,θn ) (ν).
We consider distributions for which a(ν) is monotonic in ν ∈ [0, b/2]. As a(b/2) = 0,
monotonic nature of a(ν) is dependent on the sign of a(0). The new estimation space is
 ∗
if a(0) < 0;
 [b , b/2],
A(θ1 ,...,θn ) = cc(h(θ1 ,...,θn ) (Ω1 )) = {b/2},
if a(0) = 0;

[b/2, b∗],
if a(0) > 0,

where b∗ = h(θ1 ,...,θn ) (0). It may be noted that l(A(θ1 ,...,θn ) ) ≤ b/2 which is a substantial
reduction in l(A) = b.
∗
∗
∗
∗
∗
Since G3 ⊂ G1 , all estimators θ̄, δml , δcm , δl1 , δnsm , δcw , θ̄∗ , δml
, δcm
, δl1
, δnsm
and δcw
are also G3 -invariant. For the distributions which satisfy the assumption of monotonicity
of a(ν), all these estimators can be improved by their projections on A(θ1 ,...,θn ) using
Theorem 4.1.
If θ follows a CN(ν, κ) distribution, the function a(ν) is given as
 





b
b
b
sin
−ν
tan
−ν .
a(ν) = tanh κr sin θ̃ −
2
2
2
Monotonicity of a(ν) can be easily observed. The new estimation space is equal to

if θ̄ ∈ J1 ;
 [b∗ , b/2],
A(θ̄,r) = {b/2},
if θ̄ ∈ {b/2, π + b/2};

[b/2, b∗ ],
if θ̄ ∈ I1 ,

18

Kanika and S. Kumar

where b∗ = b/2 + tan−1 [tan(b/2) tanh{κr sin(θ̄ − b/2) sin(b/2)}], J1 = J(b/2, π + b/2) and
I1 = I(b/2, π + b/2). Based on A(θ̄,R) , an estimator δ is dominated by

 δ,
δI = b ∗ ,

b/2,

if θ̄ ∈ J1 and δ ∈ [b∗ , b/2], or, θ̄ ∈ I1 and δ ∈ [b/2, b∗];
if θ̄ ∈ J1 and δ ∈ J(b∗ , γ), or, θ̄ ∈ I1 and δ ∈ (b∗ , γ);
if θ̄ ∈ J1 and δ ∈ (b/2, γ], or, θ̄ ∈ I1 and δ ∈ J(b/2, γ], or, θ̄ ∈ {b/2, π + b/2},

where γ = π + b∗ /2 + b/4. In Example 3.1, the estimator δ for ν is dominated by the
projection of δ on A. Let us denote by δ ∗ this improved estimator. Based on A(θ̄,R) ,
improved estimators δI and δI∗ of δ and δ ∗ , respectively, are equivalent except when
either δ ∈ [γ, π + b/2] and θ̄ ∈ J1 or δ ∈ [π + b/2, γ] and θ̄ ∈ I1 . If δ = θ̄, both θ̄I and θ̄I∗
are equivalent and given by





∗


b ,





b/2,



θ̄,


∗

 θ̄ < b and θ̄ ∈ [0, b/2),
if θ̄ > b∗ and θ̄ ∈ (b/2, π + b/2),


θ̄ ∈ (π + b/2, 2π),

(4.3)

if θ̄ = π + b/2,
elsewhere.

In Figure 2, we have plotted the risk functions of the MLE θ̄, restricted estimator δrml
defined in (3.3) and improved estimator θ̄I defined in (4.3) under the loss function L. The
risk values have been evaluated using simulations. For this, we have generated 100 000
samples from a CN(ν, κ) distribution for various values of (n, κ, b). The following conclusions can be made from the numerical study.
(a) The risk function of θ̄ is constant for a fixed value of (n, κ). The risk functions of
δrml and θ̄I are symmetric about b/2. For small values of κ or b, these risk functions are
strictly decreasing in ν ∈ [0, b/2]. For higher values of κ or b, behaviour is reverse.
(b) For all the values of (n, κ) and ν ∈ [0, b], δrml uniformly improves θ̄ and θ̄I uniformly
improves δrml when b ∈ (0, π]. Risk values of δrml and θ̄I are the same when b = π and
are less than that of θ̄ for all ν ∈ [0, b].
(c) The amount of relative improvement of δrml over θ̄ is increasing as κ or b decreases.
This is seen to be as high as 95%. Similarly, relative improvement of θ̄I over δrml is seen
to be up to 75%.
Similar observations have been made for various other configurations of (n, κ, b). Simulations for various directional distributions show significant improvements. We omit details
here.
Remark 4.2. For the support T, both unrestricted and restricted estimation problems
discussed in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 can be easily extendable to the case of support Tk .

Truncated circular parameters

19

Figure 2. Risk plots of (a) θ̄ (straight line), (b) δrml (dashed line) and (c) θ̄I (dotted line)
under the loss function L when b ∈ (0, π].

5. Concluding remarks
For estimating parameters in Euclidean spaces, with respect to the loss function as an
increasing function of distance, the action space is taken to be the smallest convex set
containing the estimand space. If an estimator lies outside it with a positive probability, an improvement is obtained by projecting this estimator on the action space. In
Section 3, we have extended this concept to the estimation of circular parameters of directional distributions. The result of Theorem 3.1, is not exactly analogous to the result
for Euclidean spaces. Further, [16, 22] gave a new technique for improving equivariant
estimators in Euclidean spaces. In Section 4, we have developed a theory to extend this
technique to circular parameters. The results have been applied to various estimation
problems in directional distributions. The resulting estimators are seen to show significant improvements over the usual estimators.
It would be interesting to further extend these results to parameters lying in spheres
of higher dimensions.

20

Kanika and S. Kumar

Appendix
A.1. Proof of Proposition 2.1
The statement trivially follows when A = T. From Lemma 2.2, it is sufficient to consider
A to be of I-type. First, we assume A = I[0, γ] with γ ∈ (0, π]. Note that for γ = 0, the
proof is trivial.
Let {φ1 , . . . , φn } be linearly ordered sample of n(≥ 2) observations taking values in A.
After rotating sample by an angle 2π − φ1 , modified ordered sample {0, α2 , . . . , αn } takes
values in I[0, αn ] ⊂ A with αi = φi − φ1 (i = 2, . . . , n). We have to prove
 Pn

wi sin αi
i=2
P
ᾱw = atan
∈ I[0, αn ],
n
w1 + i=2 wi cos αi

where weights are w1 , . . .P
, wn . From (2.2), the lower bound of ᾱw is zero. If αn 6= π, both
P
n
n
i=2 wi sin αi and w1 +
i=2 wi cos αi cannot be zero simultaneously, that is, ᾱw always
exists. When n = 2 and α2 = π, ᾱw does not exist if w1 = w2 .
Pn(i) Consider αn < π/2. Since tan(·) is an increasing function in [0, π/2) and w1 +
i=2 cos αi is positive, ᾱw ≤ αn is equivalent to
!
n−1
n−1
X
X
(A.1)
wi cos αi .
wi sin αi ≤ tan αn w1 +
i=2

i=2

Induction method is used to prove the inequality (A.1). For n = 2, (A.1) is reduced to
w1 tan α2 ≥ 0 which always holds. We will show that (A.1) is true for n = k + 1 after
using it for n = k. Thus,
!
!
k
k
k
X
X
X
wi sin αi .
wi cos αi =
wi cos αi ≥ tan αk w1 +
tan αk+1 w1 +
i=2

i=2

i=1

The above steps follow since tan αk ≤ tan αk+1 and (A.1) is assumed
P to be true for n = k.
(ii) Now consider the case when π/2 < αn < π. Since w1 + ni=2 wi cos αi < 0 and
tan(·) is increasing in (π/2, π], ᾱw ≤ αn is equivalent to the reverse of inequality (A.1).
The proof can be completed as above.
(iii) Cases when αn = π/2 and αn = π are straightforward.
Hence, the proposition is established for A = K1 [α, β] with α, β ∈ T. In a similar manner,
it can be proved when A is of types K1 (α, β), K1 (α, β] and K1 [α, β).

A.2. Proof of Proposition 2.2
The statement is trivially true when A = T. As in the proof of Proposition 2.1, it is
enough to prove the result only for A = [0, γ] with γ ∈ (0, π]. From (2.2), CE(θ) ≥ 0, if it

Truncated circular parameters

21

exists. Every interval is convex subset of R. Using the fact that an analogous result is
true for the expectation of random variables in R such as sin θ and cos θ ([7], page 74),
we can observe ranges of both E sin θ and E cos θ.
Suppose that Pr(θ ∈ A) = 1 and so Pr(γ − θ ∈ A) = 1. Since sin(·) is nonnegative in
the range [0, π], Pr(sin(γ − θ) ≥ 0) = 1. Thus,
E sin(γ − θ) ≥ 0.

(A.2)

(i) Consider the case 0 < γ < π/2. Since Pr(cos θ > 0) = 1, E cos θ > 0. Dividing both
sides of (A.2) by cos θ(E cos θ) (term is positive with probability one), we get
(E sin θ/E cos θ) ≤ tan γ.

(A.3)

Using facts that tan−1 (·) is increasing in [0, ∞) and atan(·) = tan−1 (·) in the range
[0, π/2), we obtain CE(θ) ≤ γ.
(ii) Consider γ = π/2. Since both E sin θ and E cos θ are nonnegative and cannot be
zero simultaneously, CE(θ) ≤ π/2.
(iii) If π/2 < γ < π, Pr(cos θ < 0) = 1 and so E cos θ is negative. Dividing both sides of
(A.2) by cos θ(E cos θ) (positive quantity), we again obtain (A.3). As tan−1 (·) is increasing
in the range (−∞, 0], we have
tan−1 (E sin θ/E cos θ) ≤ γ − π.
Since atan(·) = tan−1 (·) + π, CE(θ) ≤ γ.
(iv) Now consider that γ = π. Both sin θ ∈ [0, 1] and cos θ ∈ [−1, 1] with probability
one. Hence CE(θ) ≤ π, if it exists.
Existence of CE(θ) is not confirmed only for the case (iv). Suppose that Pr(θ = 0) =
Pr(θ = π) = 1/2, both E sin θ and E cos θ are zero, so CE(θ) does not exist. Moreover, if
A = T and θ follows uniform distribution on T with the density (2π)−1 , CE(θ) does not
exist.

A.3. Proof of Lemma 2.5
Using Lemma 2.2, it is enough to consider the case A = [0, b] with b ∈ (2π/3, π]. Decompose the set A as A1 ∪ A2 ∪ A3 , where
A1 = [0, 3b/4 − π/2),

A2 = [3b/4 − π/2, b/2],

A3 = (b/2, b],

and complement of A as B1 ∪ B2 , where
B1 = (b, π + b/2],

B2 = (π + b/2, 2π).

We have to show for all ψ ∈ A,
a(ψ) = Eθψ {u(θ)} =

Z

θ∈B1 ∪B2

u(θ)f1 (θ|ψ) dθ > 0,

(A.4)

22

Kanika and S. Kumar

where f1 (θ|ψ) is the probability density of θ with respect to Lebesgue measure and u(θ)
is given by
u(θ) = cos(θ0 − ψ) − cos(θ − ψ),

θ∈
/ A, ψ ∈ A,

with θ0 as the projection of θ on A. According to the assumption, the distribution of θ
is symmetric about ψ, therefore, we have
Eθψ cos(θ0 − ψ) = Eθb−ψ cos(θ0 − b + ψ).
Hence, a(ψ) = a(b − ψ) for ψ ∈ A. It is enough to prove that a(ψ) > 0 for ψ ∈ A1 ∪ A2 .
Next, we examine the sign of the function u(·). Define u(θ) = u1 (θ) + u2 (θ), where from
definition of projection θ0 , u1 (θ) and u2 (θ) are given by

 


θ+b
θ−b

sin
−ψ ,
if θ ∈ B1 ;
u1 (θ) = 2 sin
2
2

0,
if θ ∈ B2 ;

if θ ∈ B1 ;
 0,   

u2 (θ) = 2 sin θ sin θ − ψ ,
if θ ∈ B2 .

2
2

If θ ∈ B1 , (θ − b) ∈ (0, π − b/2] ⊂ (0, 2π/3). Hence, sign of u1 (θ) is only dependent on that
of sin((θ + b)/2 − ψ). When ψ ∈ A1 , decompose B1 as B1 = B11 ∪ B12 , where
B11 = (b, 2π + 2ψ − b],

B12 = (2π + 2ψ − b, π + b/2].

It can be noted that

 
θ+b
(b − ψ, π] ⊂ (2π/3, π],
−ψ ∈
(π, π/2 + 3b/4 − ψ] ⊂ (π, 5π/4],
2

if θ ∈ B11 ;
if θ ∈ B12 .

Thus, when ψ ∈ A1 , u1 (θ) ≥ 0 for θ ∈ B11 and u1 (θ) < 0 for θ ∈ B12 . If θ ∈ B1 and ψ ∈ A2 ,
((θ + b)/2 − ψ) ∈ (π/3, π] and so u1 (θ) ≥ 0. Similarly, when θ ∈ B2 , θ/2 ⊂ (2π/3, π), the
sign of u2 (θ) is only dependent on that of sin(θ/2 − ψ). If θ ∈ B2 and ψ ∈ A1 ∪ A2 ,
(θ/2 − ψ) ∈ (π/4, π). This implies that u2 (θ) > 0 when ψ ∈ A1 ∪ A2 .
From Table A.1, it is sufficient to prove
Z
u(θ)f1 (θ|ψ) dθ > 0
for ψ ∈ A1 .
(A.5)
θ∈B12 ∪B2

Now we examine two cases separately, when distribution of θ is unimodal and bimodal.
(i) If density f1 (θ|ψ) is either f (θ|ψ) or εf (θ|ψ) + (1 − ε)f (θ|ψ + π) with ε ≥ (1 +
ζmin )−1 , distribution of θ is unimodal with mode at ψ. It means that f1 (θ|ψ) is increasing
in θ ∈ [ψ + π, 2π). Write u(θ) = v1 (θ)+ v2 (θ), where for i = 1, 2, vi (θ) = ui (θ), θ ∈ B12 ∪B2 .

Truncated circular parameters

23

Table A.1. Behaviour of functions u1 (θ) and u2 (θ)
A1

A2

A1 ∪ A2

B1

u1 (θ) ≥ 0
u1 (θ) < 0

u1 (θ) ≥ 0

u2 (θ) = 0

B2

u1 (θ) = 0

u1 (θ) = 0

u2 (θ) > 0

Thus,
v1 (θ)
=
v2 (θ)



−∞,
0,

if θ ∈ B12 ;
if θ ∈ B2 .

Therefore, both v1 (θ)/v2 (θ) and f1 (θ|ψ) are increasing in θ ∈ B12 ∪ B2 . Let φ be a
uniform distributed random variable with respect to Lebesgue measure such that Pr(φ ∈
B12 ∪ B2 ) = 1. As Eφ {v2 (φ)f1 (φ|ψ)} > 0, using a result of [2], Theorem 2.1, we have
Eφ {v1 (φ)} Eφ {v1 (φ)f1 (φ|ψ)}
≤
.
Eφ {v2 (φ)} Eφ {v2 (φ)f1 (φ|ψ)}
In order to prove (A.5), it remains to show
Eφ {v1 (φ) + v2 (φ)} > 0

for all ψ ∈ A1 .

(A.6)

The above holds since we have
(b − 2ψ)Eφ {v1 (φ) + v2 (φ)} =

Z

θ∈B12 ∪B2

{cos(φ0 − ψ) − cos(φ − ψ)} dφ > 0.

This completes the proof when distribution of θ is unimodal.
(ii) Now we assume that θ has a mixture distribution with the probability density
f1 (θ|ψ) = εf (θ|ψ) + (1 − ε)f (θ|ψ + π) with 1/2 ≤ ε < (1 + ζmin )−1 , that is, the distribution
of θ is bimodal. It has two modes ψ and ψ + π. Antimodes are ψ + w and ψ + 2π − w(= β),
where w = cos−1 (ζ −1 ((1 − ε)/ε)). According to condition (C2) , w ∈ [π/2, π). We may
note that β ≤ 2π since ψ < π/2 ≤ w as ψ ∈ A1 . This implies that f1 (θ|ψ) is increasing in
θ ∈ [β, 2π). If β ≤ 2π + 2ψ − b, (A.5) can be proved following the lines of the above case.
When β > 2π + 2ψ − b, decompose the set B12 ∪ B2 = (2π + 2ψ − b, 2π) as C1 ∪ C2 ∪ C3 ,
where
C1 = (2π + 2ψ − b, β],

C2 = (β, 2π − 2w + b],

C3 = (2π − 2w + b, 2π).

Since the probability density f1 (θ|ψ) is symmetric about β, that is, f1 (θ|ψ) = f1 (2β −
θ|ψ), we have
Z
Z
Z
u(2β − θ)f1 (θ|ψ) dθ.
u(2β − θ)f1 (2β − θ|ψ) dθ =
u(θ)f1 (θ|ψ) dθ =
θ∈C1

θ∈C2

θ∈C2

24

Kanika and S. Kumar

Define
u3 (θ) =



u(θ) + u(2β − θ),
u(θ),

if θ ∈ C2 ;
if θ ∈ C3 .

It may be noted that (A.6) yields the following for ψ ∈ A1 :
Z
Z
u(θ) dθ ≥ 0.
u3 (θ) dθ =

(A.7)

θ∈B12 ∪B2

θ∈C2 ∪C3

Consider the function

 

θ − θ0
θ + θ0
u(θ) + u(2β − θ) = 4 sin
cos
− β sin(β − ψ).
2
2
When θ ∈ B12 ∪ B2 , sin((θ − θ0 )/2) > 0. Note that sin(β − ψ) = − sin(w) < 0 as w ∈
[π/2, π). The sign of u(θ) + u(2β − θ) is the opposite of that of cos((θ + θ0 )/2 − β). There
are three cases according to π + b/2 ∈ Ci , for i = 1, 2, 3. As in the case when distribution
of θ is unimodal, we define two functions v1 (θ) and v2 (θ) for θ ∈ C2 ∪ C3 in all these
three cases such that v1 (θ)/v2 (θ) is increasing in θ ∈ C2 ∪ C3 and v2 (θ) is nonnegative
for all θ ∈ C2 ∪ C3 .
When π + b/2 ∈ C1 , choices are


0,
if θ ∈ C2 ;
u(θ) + u(2β − θ),
if θ ∈ C2 ;
v1 (θ) =
v2 (θ) =
u(θ),
if θ ∈ C3 ;
0,
if θ ∈ C3 .
Now consider π + b/2 ∈ C2 . Decompose the interval C2 = C21 ∪ C22 , where
C21 = (β, π + b/2],

C22 = (π + b/2, 2π − 2w + b].

In this case, we choose

 u(θ) + u(2β − θ),
v1 (θ) = 0,

0,

 0,
v2 (θ) = u(θ) + u(2β − θ),

u(θ),

if θ ∈ C21 ;
if θ ∈ C22 ;
if θ ∈ C3 ;
if θ ∈ C21 ;
if θ ∈ C22 ;
if θ ∈ C3 .

When π + b/2 ∈ C3 , decompose the interval C3 = C31 ∪ C32 , where
C31 = (2π − 2w + b, π + b/2],
In this case, we define

 u(θ) + u(2β − θ),
v1 (θ) = 0,

u(θ),

if θ ∈ C2 ;
if θ ∈ C31 ;
if θ ∈ C32 ;

C32 = (π + b/2, 2π).

v2 (θ) =

(

0,
−u(θ),
0,

if θ ∈ C2 ;
if θ ∈ C31 ;
if θ ∈ C32 .

Truncated circular parameters

25

Since the density f1 (θ|ψ) is increasing in θ ∈ C2 ∪ C3 , Theorem 2.1 of [2] completes the
proof when distribution of θ is bimodal.

A.4. Proof of Lemma 4.1
See [22], Lemma 2, for the proof of (i). Note that the proof given in [22] utilizes the
measure perseverance of the element g ∈ G under the measure η, that is, η(g−1 (B)) 6=
η(B) for all B ∈ B(Z), where B(Z) consists of Borel sets of the sample space Z. Later,
Moors and van Houwelingen [23] relaxed this condition of measure perseverance.
For any g ∈ G, if δ is an G-equivariant estimator, we have L(ḡ(ν), g̃(δ)) = L(ν, δ), that
is,
cos(hḡ(ν) − g̃(δ)) = cos(h(ν) − δ),

(A.8)

for all ν ∈ Ω and δ ∈ A. Substituting δ = h(ν), we obtain cos(hḡ(ν) − g̃h(ν)) = 1. Thus,
we have hḡ(ν) = g̃h(ν) mod (2π), for all ν ∈ Ω. This proves (ii). Exploiting this result,
(A.8) reduces to
d(g̃h(ν), g̃(δ)) = d(h(ν), δ),
for all ν ∈ Ω and δ ∈ h(Ω). This implies that g̃(·) is distance-preserving map on A. Let
ψ be the projection of g̃(φ) on g̃(A). Since g̃(·) is injective, we have
d(g̃(φ), ψ) = d(φ, φ0 ) = d(g̃(φ), g̃(φ0 )).
From the uniqueness of projection, ψ = g̃(φ0 ). This proves (iii).

A.5. Proof of Lemma 4.2
First, we show that for all g ∈ G and ν ∈ Ω, new estimand hz (ν) satisfies
hg(z) ḡ(ν) = g̃hz (ν)

for all ν ∈ Ω.

Note that
Z
Z
∗
∗
f (z|ḡ−1 ḡ∗ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g∗ )
f (g(z)|ḡ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g ) =

(A.9)

(from Lemma 4.1(i))

G

G

=

Z

G

f (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ )

(using transformation g∗ → gg∗ g−1 ).

R
This implies that for G f (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ ) = 0, (A.9) follows from Lemma 4.1(ii). In the
R
case of G f (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ ) > 0, for any g ∈ G, we have

R
sin(g̃ ∗ hḡ(ν))τ (g(z)|ḡ∗ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g∗ )
hg(z) ḡ(ν) = atan R G
∗
∗
∗
G cos(g̃ hḡ(ν))τ (g(z)|ḡ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g )

26

Kanika and S. Kumar

R
∗
−1 ∗
ḡ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g∗ )
G sin(hḡ ḡ(ν))τ (z|ḡ
R
= atan
cos(hḡ∗ ḡ(ν))τ (z|ḡ−1 ḡ∗ ḡ(ν)) dλ(g∗ )
G
R


sin(g̃g̃ ∗ h(ν))τ (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ )
= atan R G
∗
∗
∗
G cos(g̃g̃ h(ν))τ (z|ḡ (ν)) dλ(g )


R
sin(g̃ ∗ h(ν))τ (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ )
G
= g̃ atan R
cos(g̃ ∗ h(ν))τ (z|ḡ∗ (ν)) dλ(g∗ )
G

= g̃hz (ν)

for all ν ∈ Ω. The above equalities utilize Lemmas 4.1 and 2.3, the transformation g∗ →
gg∗ g−1 and the circular property of g̃. Therefore, the surjection property of ḡ and (A.9)
imply that
g̃hz (Ω) = hg(z) (Ω),

(A.10)

or equivalently, cc(g̃hz (Ω)) = cc(hg(z) (Ω)) = Ag(z) . Clearly, g̃-image of a closed convex
set is again a closed convex set. Therefore, g̃(cc(hz (Ω))) is also a closed convex and
g̃hz (Ω) ⊂ g̃(cc(hz (Ω))). This implies that
Ag(z) = cc(g̃hz (Ω)) ⊂ g̃(cc(hz (Ω))) = g̃(Az )
as cc(g̃hz (Ω)) is the smallest convex set containing g̃hz (Ω). Next, we show that g̃(Az ) ⊂
Ag(z) . As φ ∈ Az = conv(hz (Ω)) ∪ bd(hz (Ω)), there can be the following two cases:

(i) Suppose φ ∈ conv(hz (Ω)). From Proposition 2.1, there exists φ1 , φ2 ∈ hz (Ω) such
that


w sin φ1 + (1 − w) sin φ2
.
φ = atan
w cos φ1 + (1 − w) cos φ2
Operating g̃ on the both sides of the above equation and using the circular property, we
get


w sin g̃(φ1 ) + (1 − w) sin g̃(φ2 )
.
g̃(φ) = atan
w cos g̃(φ1 ) + (1 − w) cos g̃(φ2 )
Note that g̃(φ1 ), g̃(φ2 ) ∈ g̃hz (Ω). Using (A.10), both belong to hg(z) (Ω). Therefore, g̃(φ) ∈
conv(hg(z) (Ω)) ⊂ Ag(z) .
(ii) Any φ ∈ bd(hz (Ω)) is the limit point of a series of points {φn } with φn ∈
conv(hz (Ω)). Since g̃ is circular so is continuous, g̃(φ) is the limit point of the series
{g̃(φn )} in conv(g̃hz (Ω)) = conv(hg(z) (Ω)). Hence, g̃(φ) ∈ bd(hg(z) (Ω)) ⊂ Ag(z) .

A.6. Proof of Theorem 4.1
Since risk of an equivariant estimator δ(Z) is constant on the orbits of ν ([7], page 149),
risk of the G-equivariant estimator δ(Z) under the loss function L satisfies R(ν, δ) =

Truncated circular parameters
R

G

27

R(ḡ(ν), δ) dλ(g). Using this, the risk of δ(Z) is given by
R(ν, δ) =

Z Z

Z

{1 − cos(δ(z) − hḡ(ν))}f (z|ḡ(ν)) dη(z)) dλ(g)

Z Z

G

{1 − cos(δ(z) − g̃h(ν))}f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) dη(z).

G

=

Z

In the above step, we utilize the interchange in order of integration and Lemma 4.1(ii).
Note that δ0 (g(z)) is the projection of δ(g(z)) on Ag(z) , that is, δ0 (g(z)) is the projection of g̃(δ(z)) on g̃(Az ) from invariance of δ(z) and Lemma 4.2. From Lemma 4.1(iii),
δ0 (g(z)) = g̃(δ0 (z)), or equivalently, δ0 (z) is also G-equivariant estimator. Therefore, the
above risk expression is also valid for δ0 (z). The difference R(ν, δ) − R(ν, δ0 ) is given by
Z
Z
u=
{cos(δ0 (z) − g̃h(ν)) − cos(δ(z) − g̃h(ν))}f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) dη(z)
δ(z)∈A
/ z

=

Z

δ(z)∈A
/ z

G



g

E {cos(δ0 (z) − g̃h(ν)) − cos(δ(z) − g̃h(ν))}

Z

G


f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) dη(z),

R

if G f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) > 0, where the expectation is taken over g with respect to a probability measure τ (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g). Using the representation of hz (ν) given in (4.2) and
denoting by vz (ν) = [{E sin(g̃h(ν))}2 + {E sin(g̃h(ν))}2 ]1/2 , we have
sin hz (ν) = E sin(g̃h(ν))/vz (ν),
cos hz (ν) = E cos(g̃h(ν))/vz (ν),
the risk difference is given by
Z
Z
vz (ν){cos(δ0 (z) − hz (ν)) − cos(δ(z) − hz (ν))} f (z|ḡ(ν)) dλ(g) dη(z).
u=
δ(z)∈A
/ z

G

If l(Az ) ≤ (2/3)π, the above integrand is positive since cos(δ(z) − hz (ν)) ≤ cos(δ0 (z) −
hz (ν)) from Lemma 2.4. This completes the proof.

Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to the two referees and an associate editor for their constructive
comments and suggestions which have substantially improved the paper.

References
[1] Batschelet, E. (1981). Circular Statistics in Biology. London: Academic Press.
MR0659065

28

Kanika and S. Kumar

[2] Bhattacharya, C.G. (1984). Two inequalities with an application. Ann. Inst. Statist.
Math. 36 129–134. MR0752011
[3] Buss, S.R. and Fillmore, J.P. (2001). Spherical averages and applications to spherical
splines and interpolation. ACM Trans. Graph. 20 95–126.
[4] Danzer, L., Grünbaum, B. and Klee, V. (1963). Helly’s theorem and its relatives.
In Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. VII 101–180. Providence, RI: Amer. Math. Soc.
MR0157289
[5] Ducharme, G.R. and Milasevic, P. (1987). Spatial median and directional data.
Biometrika 74 212–215. MR0885936
[6] Eaton, M.L. (1989). Group Invariance Applications in Statistics. Regional Conference
Series in Probability and Statistics. Hayward, CA: IMS.
[7] Ferguson, T.S. (1967). Mathematical Statistics: A Decision Theoretic Approach. New
York: Academic Press. MR0215390
[8] Fisher, N.I. (1993). Statistical Analysis of Circular Data. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Press. MR1251957
[9] Gradshteyn, I.S. and Ryzhik, I.M. (1965). Table of Integrals, Series and Products. New
York: Academic Press.
[10] He, X. and Simpson, D.G. (1992). Robust direction estimation. Ann. Statist. 20 351–369.
MR1150348
[11] Holmquist, B. (1991). Estimating and testing the common mean direction of several von Mises–Fisher populations with known concentrations. Statistics 22 369–378.
MR1108133
[12] Jammalamadaka, S.R. and SenGupta, A. (2001). Topics in Circular Statistics 5. River
Edge, NJ: World Scientific. MR1836122
[13] Jones, M.C. and Pewsey, A. (2005). A family of symmetric distributions on the circle.
J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 100 1422–1428. MR2236452
[14] Kubokawa, T. (2004). Minimaxity in estimation of restricted parameters. J. Japan Statist.
Soc. 34 229–253. MR2116757
[15] Kubokawa, T. (2005). Estimation of bounded location and scale parameters. J. Japan
Statist. Soc. 35 221–249. MR2328426
[16] Kumar, S. and Sharma, D. (1992). An inadmissibility result for affine equivariant estimators. Statist. Decisions 10 87–97. MR1165706
[17] Marchand, E. and Strawderman, W.E. (2004). Estimation in restricted parameter
spaces: A review. In A Festschrift for Herman Rubin. Institute of Mathematical Statistics Lecture Notes – Monograph Series 45 21–44. Beachwood, OH: IMS. MR2126884
[18] Marchand, É. and Strawderman, W.E. (2012). A unified minimax result for restricted
parameter spaces. Bernoulli 18 635–643. MR2922464
[19] Mardia, K.V. and Jupp, P.E. (2000). Directional Statistics. Wiley Series in Probability
and Statistics. Chichester: Wiley. MR1828667
[20] Mardia, K.V. and Sutton, T.W. (1978). A model for cylindrical variables with applications. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B 40 229–233.
[21] Moors, J.J.A. (1985). Estimation in truncated parameter space. Ph.D. dissertation,
Tilburg Univ., The Netherlands.
[22] Moors, J.J.A. (1981). Inadmissibility of linearly invariant estimators in truncated parameter spaces. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 76 910–915. MR0650903
[23] Moors, J.J.A. and van Houwelingen, J.C. (1993). Estimation of linear models with
inequality restrictions. Stat. Neerl. 47 185–198. MR1243854

Truncated circular parameters

29

[24] Neeman, T. and Chang, T. (2001). Rank score statistics for spherical data. Contemp.
Math. 287 241–254.
[25] Rueda, C., Fernández, M.A. and Peddada, S.D. (2009). Estimation of parameters
subject to order restrictions on a circle with application to estimation of phase angles
of cell cycle genes. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 104 338–347. MR2504381
[26] Tsai, M.-T. (2009). Asymptotically efficient two-sample rank tests for modal directions on
spheres. J. Multivariate Anal. 100 445–458. MR2483430
[27] Udrişte, C. (1994). Convex Functions and Optimization Methods on Riemannian Manifolds. Mathematics and Its Applications 297. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. MR1326607
[28] van Eeden, C. (2006). Restricted Parameter Space Estimation Problems. New York:
Springer. MR2265239
[29] Watson, G.S. (1983). Statistics on Spheres. New York: Wiley. MR0709262
Received January 2015

