2014
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1404.6224
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Convex set detection

Abstract: We address the problem of one dimensional segment detection and estimation, in a regression setup. At each point of a fixed or random design, one observes whether that point belongs to the unknown segment or not, up to some additional noise. We try to understand what the minimal size of the segment is so it can be accurately seen by some statistical procedure, and how this minimal size depends on some a priori knowledge about the location of the unknown segment.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Theorem 4.3 shows that under suitable d, the location of estimated change point is rate optimal (Brunel, 2014).…”
Section: Minimax Localization Ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Theorem 4.3 shows that under suitable d, the location of estimated change point is rate optimal (Brunel, 2014).…”
Section: Minimax Localization Ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to determine the most relevant way to integrate this knowledge, we have used an exact expression for the probability distribution function as well as an exponential inequality for the supremum of Poisson processes with shift, both due to Pyke [89,Equation (6) and Theorem 3]. This has led to a new procedure which is rather atypical regarding the other tests of this paper, and which can be related to Brunel's [19] scan test in the Gaussian set-up.…”
Section: Known Change Heightmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But the procedures introduced in this work go beyond the scope of the present minimax testing study as they further address the twin problems of detecting and localising multiple change-points. In the case where the change height is known, equal to 1, Brunel [19] constructed a test based on a scanning of the shifted test statistic τ +ℓ−1 i=τ Y i − ℓ/2, which is consistent as soon as ℓ/ log n → +∞. Still considering the ℓ 2 metric on the mean vectors, but considering, among piecewise monotone signals estimation problems, the special problem of detecting a jump from an unknown constant mean, Gao et al [54] obtained a lower bound of order √ log log n. More precisely, they proved that no test can reliably detect Y such that E [ Y i ] = δ1 {i∈[τ,n]} (with τ ∈ {2, .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our procedure P n has no need to specify the parameter L or any other unknown parameters. (4) The LRS procedure has a computational complexity of O(nL). Depending on the choice of L, the complexity could be large.…”
Section: Block Signal Identification Under Gaussian White Noisementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is also interesting to compare our results with other results in change-point detection settings. For most research in change-point detection area, they typically seek to find an rate optimal solution rather than an exact optimal solution, due to the more complex structure they consider, see for example [12] and [4]. Our signal identification problem has a slightly easier setting and we can achieve the exact optimal constant.…”
Section: Disucssionmentioning
confidence: 99%