# MD2sample

    library(MD2sample)
    BT=100  #number of simulations for testing
    BP=50  #number of simulations for power estimation
    # These are set very low to satisfy CRAN submission rules

Note that all examples are run without parallel processing and a small number of simulation runs B to satisfy CRAN submission rules.

This package brings together a number of routines for the two sample problem for multivariate data. There are two data sets x and y and we want to test whether they were generated by the same probability distribution.

The highlights of this package are:

- it runs a large number of tests simultaneously.
- the user can provide their own tests
- it works for continuous and for discrete data.
- some tests use the permutation method to find p values, others use some large sample theory.
- the user can also provide a routine to generate simulated data for the goodness-of-fit/two-sample hybrid problem.
- tests can be combined and a single adjusted p value found
- it uses Rcpp and parallel programming to be very fast.
- it includes routines that make power studies very simple.
- it has a routine that runs (up to) 50 different case studies, comparing the power of a new method to those included in the package. This will make it very easy for someone who has developed a new method to compare its performance vs. those included in the package.

## Continuous Data

### Example 1

We generate two-dimensional data sets of size 100 and 120 respectively from multivariate normal distributions and run the test:

    set.seed(123)

    x1 = mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, c(0,0))
    y1 = mvtnorm::rmvnorm(120, c(0,0))
    twosample_test(x1, y1, B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be continuous
    #> $statistics
    #>        KS         K       CvM        AD       NN1       NN5        AZ        BF
    #>  0.108300  0.176600  0.075930  0.562000  1.108300  2.036700  0.006952  0.250400
    #>        BG       MMD        FR       NN0       CF1       CF2       CF3       CF4
    #>  0.763600  0.020930 -1.102000  0.227200 -1.102000  1.441500  1.127300  1.285200
    #>      Ball        ES        EP
    #>  0.006210 15.452000 32.531000
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #>     KS      K    CvM     AD    NN1    NN5     AZ     BF     BG    MMD     FR
    #> 0.7800 0.7700 0.7300 0.8800 0.1300 0.3600 0.5000 0.5700 0.3600 0.3400 0.1353
    #>    NN0    CF1    CF2    CF3    CF4   Ball     ES     EP
    #> 0.1555 0.1353 0.4864 0.1298 0.3027 0.3761 0.3479 0.1144

Arguments of twosample_test

- x a matrix of numbers with different observations in different rows, or a list of x and y.
- y a matrix of numbers, or missing if x is a list with both data sets.
- TS a routine to calculate test statistics or p values for new tests.
- TSextra additional info passed to TS, if necessary.
- B=5000 number of simulation runs for permutation test.
- nbins=c(5,5) bins for chi square tests (2D only).
- minexpcount=5 lowest required count for chi-square test.
- Ranges=matrix(c(-Inf, Inf, -Inf, Inf),2,2) a 2x2 matrix with lower and upper bounds of observations.
- rnull routine that generates data under the null hypothesis, for hybrid problem (see below).
- DoTransform=TRUE should data be transfomed to unit hypercube?
- SuppressMessages=FALSE should informative messages be printed?
- maxProcessor maximum number of cores to use. If set to 1 no parallel processing is used.
- doMethods=“all” names of method to include.

### New Tests

The routine chiTS.cont (included in the package) finds either the test statistic or the p value of a chi square test in two dimensions. First we need to set

    TSextra=list(which="statistic", nbins=cbind(c(3,3), c(3,4)))

this list is passed to chiTS.cont and tells the routine to

- return the test statistic (and not the p value)
- Run two tests, first with 3 and 3 bins in the x and y direction and then 3 and 4 bins.

    twosample_test(x1, y1, TS=chiTS.cont, TSextra=TSextra,
                   B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be continuous
    #> $statistics
    #> Chisq Stat 3,3 Chisq Stat 3,4
    #>         4.2376        16.3280
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #> Chisq Stat 3,3 Chisq Stat 3,4
    #>           0.82           0.12

Arguments and output of new test routine for continuous data

The arguments have to be x and y for the two data sets and (optionally) a list called TSextra for any additional input needed to find test statistic.

Note that the output vector of the routine has to be a named vector. If the routine is written in Rcpp parallel programming is not available.

### Adjusted p values

If several tests are run one can use the routine twosample_test_adjusted_pvalue to find a p value that is adjusted for simultaneous testing:

    twosample_test_adjusted_pvalue(x1, y1, B=c(BT, BT),
                                   maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be continuous
    #> p values of individual tests:
    #> ES :  0.3027
    #> CvM :  0.79
    #> AZ :  0.41
    #> NN5 :  0.35
    #> BG :  0.31
    #> adjusted p value of combined tests: 0.84

### Power Estimation

The routine twosample_power allows us to estimate the power of the tests.

### Example 2

Let’s say we want to estimate the power when one data set comes from a multivariate standard normal distribution and the other from a normal distribution with a different covariance. We first need a function that generates these data sets:

    f=function(a=0) {
       S=diag(2)
       x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, sigma = S)
       S[1,2]=a
       S[2,1]=a
       y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(120, sigma = S)
       list(x=x, y=y)
    }

Now we can run

    twosample_power(f, c(0,0.5), B=BP, maxProcessor=1)
    #>       KS    K  CvM   AD  NN1  NN5   AZ   BF   BG  MMD  FR  NN0 CF1  CF2  CF3
    #> 0   0.04 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.1 0.04 0.1 0.04 0.08
    #> 0.5 0.38 0.36 0.46 0.40 0.22 0.38 0.46 0.40 0.06 0.48 0.3 0.22 0.3 0.12 0.30
    #>      CF4 Ball   ES   EP
    #> 0   0.08 0.06 0.02 0.00
    #> 0.5 0.20 0.08 0.50 0.52

Arguments of twosample_power

- f a function that generates data
- … arguments passed to f, up to 2.
- TS a routine to calculate test statistics or p values for new tests.
- TSextra additional info passed to TS, if necessary.
- alpha=0.05 desired type I error probability.
- B=1000 number of simulation runs for power estimation.
- nbins=c(5,5) bins for chi square tests (2D only).
- minexpcount=5 lowest required count for chi-square test.
- Ranges=matrix(c(-Inf, Inf, -Inf, Inf),2,2) a 2x2 matrix with lower and upper bounds of observations.
- rnull routine that generates data under the null hypothesis, for hybrid problem (see below).
- DoTransform=TRUE should data be transformed to unit hypercube?
- SuppressMessages=FALSE should informative messages be printed?
- LargeSampleOnly=FALSE should only methods with large sample theories be run?
- doMethods=“all” names of method to include.

Again the user can provide their own routine:

    twosample_power(f, c(0,0.5), TS=chiTS.cont,
                    TSextra=TSextra, B=BP, maxProcessor=1)
    #>     Chisq Stat 3,3 Chisq Stat 3,4
    #> 0             0.06           0.16
    #> 0.5           0.72           0.64

The routine that generates data can also have two arguments:

    f1=function(a=0, n=100) {
       S=diag(2)
       x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, sigma = S)
       S[1,2]=a
       S[2,1]=a
       y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(n, sigma = S)
       list(x=x, y=y)
    }

If the user routine returns p values run

    TSextra=list(which="pvalue", nbins=c(5,5))
    twosample_power(f1, c(0,0.5), c(100, 120),
                    TS=chiTS.cont, TSextra=TSextra, B=BP,
                    With.p.value=TRUE, maxProcessor=1)
    #>         Chisq Pval 5,5
    #> 0|100             0.02
    #> 0.5|120           0.48

## Discrete Data

First note that tests for discrete data are implemented only in two dimensions.

### Example 3

We consider the case of data from binomial distributions:

    vals_x = 0:5 #possible values of first random variable
    vals_y = 0:6 #possible values of second random variable
    a1x = rbinom(1000, 5, 0.5)
    a2x = rbinom(1000, 6, 0.5)
    a1y = rbinom(1200, 5, 0.5)
    a2y = rbinom(1200, 6, 0.5)
    x2=matrix(0, 6*7, 4)
    colnames(x2)=c("vals_x", "vals_y", "x", "y")
    x2[, 1]=rep(vals_x, length(vals_y))
    x2[, 2]=rep(vals_y, each=length(vals_x))
    for(i in 0:5) {
      for(j in 0:6) {
        x2[x2[,1]==i&x2[,2]==j, 3]=sum(a1x==i&a2x==j)
        x2[x2[,1]==i&x2[,2]==j, 4]=sum(a1y==i&a2y==j)
      }
    }
    twosample_test(x2, B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be discrete
    #> $statistics
    #>        KS         K       CvM        AD        NN        AZ        BF ChiSquare
    #>   0.03666   0.05816   0.12590   0.83510   4.12430   0.03132   0.04248  36.42000
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #>        KS         K       CvM        AD        NN        AZ        BF ChiSquare
    #>    0.3200    0.2400    0.4700    0.4800    0.1600    0.4600    0.5300    0.4025

Arguments of twosample_test

As in the case of continuous data the arguments include TS, TSextra, minexpcount, rnull, maxProcessor and doMethods. In addition we now have

- x either a vector of counts for first variable, or a matrix with columns vals_x, vals_y, x and y.
- y vector with counts of second variable
- vals_x possible values of first variable
- vals_y possible values of second variable
- samplingmethod =“Binomial” how the permuted data is found. The alternative is “independence”, which is slightly more accurate but also much slower.

### Adjusted p values

Again one can find a p value adjusted for simultaneous testing:

    twosample_test_adjusted_pvalue(x2, B=c(BT, BT), maxProcessor=1)
    #> Data is assumed to be discrete
    #> p values of individual tests:
    #> Chisquare :  0.4025
    #> KS :  0.37
    #> AZ :  0.51
    #> CvM :  0.54
    #> adjusted p value of combined tests: 0.7926

### User supplied tests

The routine chiTS.disc (included in package) does a chi-square test for discrete data:

    TSextra=list(which="statistic")
    twosample_test(x2, TS=chiTS.disc, TSextra=TSextra,
                   B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be discrete
    #> $statistics
    #> Chisq Stat
    #>     38.014
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #> Chisq Stat
    #>       0.67

### Power Estimation

Again we need a routine that generates data sets. In the discrete case this has to be a routine whose output is a matrix with columns named vals_x, vals_y, x and y

    g=function(a=0) {
       x=cbind(rbinom(1000, 5, 0.5), rpois(1000, 1))
       x[,2][x[,2]>5]=5
       lambda=1+a*x[,1]/5
       y=cbind(rbinom(1200, 5, 0.5), rpois(1200, lambda))
       y[,2][y[,2]>5]=5
       vx=0:5
       vy=0:5
       A=matrix(0,length(vx)*length(vy),4)
       k=0
       for(i in seq_along(vx))
         for(j in seq_along(vy)) {
           k=k+1
           A[k,1]=vx[i]
           A[k,2]=vy[j]
           A[k,3]=sum(x[,1]==vx[i] & x[,2]==vy[j])
           A[k,4]=sum(y[,1]==vx[i] & y[,2]==vy[j])
         }
       colnames(A)=c("vals_x", "vals_y", "x", "y")
       A
    }

    twosample_power(g, c(0, 0.25, 0.5), B=BP, maxProcessor=1)
    #>        KS    K  CvM   AD   NN   AZ   BF Chisquare
    #> 0    0.04 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00      0.02
    #> 0.25 0.50 0.52 0.44 0.48 0.18 0.14 0.16      0.20
    #> 0.5  1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.88 0.46 0.38      0.92

or using a user supplied test:

    TSextra=list(which="statistic")
    twosample_power(g, c(0, 0.25, 0.5), B=BP,
                    TS=chiTS.disc, TSextra=TSextra, maxProcessor=1)
    #>      Chisq Stat
    #> 0          0.02
    #> 0.25       0.10
    #> 0.5        0.78
    TSextra=list(which="pvalue")
    twosample_power(g, c(0, 0.25, 0.5), B=BP,
        TS=chiTS.disc, TSextra=TSextra, With.p.value = TRUE,
        maxProcessor=1)
    #>      Chisq P
    #> 0       0.00
    #> 0.25    0.12
    #> 0.5     0.86

## Goodness-of-fit/Two-sample hybrid problem

We have a data set x and we want to test whether it comes from a bivariate normal distribution. Instead of a goodness-of-fit test, however, we generate a Monte Carlo data set y from a bivariate normal rv with mean and covariance estimated from the real data set x, and then run a two-sample test.

In this scenario the two data sets are not independent, and the permutation approach to finding p values is extremely conservative, that is, the true type I error probability is much smaller than the nominal one. This in turn makes the power of the test much lower as well. Instead one can supply a routine that generates new data, just as one would in a goodness-of-fit test. Moreover, all the methods who find their own p values will now fail completely and so should not be run.

    # generate real and MC data sets:
    f=function(mu) {
        x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, c(mu, mu))
        y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, apply(x, 2, mean), cor(x))
        list(x=x, y=y)
    }
    #True data is a mixture of normal and uniform
    g=function(alpha=0) {
        x=rbind(mvtnorm::rmvnorm((1-alpha)*100, c(0, 0)),
                matrix(runif(200*alpha),ncol=2))
        y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(100, apply(x, 2, mean), cor(x))
        list(x=x, y=y)
    }
    # generate two-sample data set
    rnull=function(dta) {
       x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(nrow(dta$x), apply(dta$x, 2, mean), cor(dta$x))
       y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(nrow(x), apply(x, 2, mean), cor(x))
       list(x=x, y=y)
    }

    # Only run these methods for hybrid problem
    mt=c("KS", "K", "CvM", "AD", "NN1", "NN5", "AZ", "BF", "BG", "MMD")
    # Null hypothesis is true:
    twosample_power(f, c(0, 1), doMethods = mt, B=BP, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> MMD is not an included method for continuous data!
    #> For continuous data included methods are
    #> Method               Code
    #> Kolmogorov-Smirnov   KS
    #> Kuiper               K
    #> Cramer-vonMises      CvM
    #> Anderson-Darling     AD
    #> 1-nearest neighbor   NN1
    #> 5-nearest neighbor   NN5
    #> Aslan-Zech           AZ
    #> Baringhaus-Franz     BF
    #> Biswas-Ghosh         BG
    #> Friedman-Rafski      FR
    #> x nearest neighbor   NN0
    #> Chen-Friedman        CF1-CF4
    #> Ball Divergence      Ball
    #> Chi square tests     ES, EP
    #> NULL
    twosample_power(f, c(0, 1), rnull=rnull, B=BP, maxProcessor = 1)
    #>     KS    K  CvM   AD  NN1  NN5   AZ   BF   BG  MMD
    #> 0 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.06 0.12
    #> 1 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.06
    # Null hypothesis is false:
    twosample_power(g, c(0, 0.5), doMethods = mt, B=BP, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> MMD is not an included method for continuous data!
    #> For continuous data included methods are
    #> Method               Code
    #> Kolmogorov-Smirnov   KS
    #> Kuiper               K
    #> Cramer-vonMises      CvM
    #> Anderson-Darling     AD
    #> 1-nearest neighbor   NN1
    #> 5-nearest neighbor   NN5
    #> Aslan-Zech           AZ
    #> Baringhaus-Franz     BF
    #> Biswas-Ghosh         BG
    #> Friedman-Rafski      FR
    #> x nearest neighbor   NN0
    #> Chen-Friedman        CF1-CF4
    #> Ball Divergence      Ball
    #> Chi square tests     ES, EP
    #> NULL
    twosample_power(g, c(0, 0.5), rnull=rnull, B=BP, maxProcessor = 1)
    #>       KS    K  CvM   AD  NN1  NN5   AZ   BF   BG  MMD
    #> 0   0.18 0.02 0.18 0.10 0.06 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
    #> 0.5 0.90 0.98 0.78 0.74 0.48 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

As we can see, the true type I error using the permutation method is much smaller than the nominal \(\alpha=0.05\), and so the power is lower as well.

## Benchmarking

The routine run.studies allows the user to quickly compare the power of a new test with the power of the included tests for 25 different combinations of null hypothesis vs alternative for continuous data and 20 for discrete data. It also allows the user to find the power for those case studies for different sample size and type I error probabilities.

As an example, let’s compare the power of the test based on differences in means to the included ones for two of the studies.

Note that these examples are not run so the package can be submitted to CRAN:

    run.studies(Continuous=TRUE,
                TS=newTest_1,
                study=c("NormalD2", "tD2"),
                B=1000)

Arguments of run.studies

- Continuous=TRUE run cases for continuous data.
- TS routine to calculate test statistics.
- study either the name of the study, or its number. If missing all the studies are run.
- TSextra list passed to TS, if any.
- With.p.value=FALSE does user supplied routine return p values?
- nsample=200 desired sample size.
- alpha=0.05 type I error.
- param_alt (list of) values of parameter under the alternative hypothesis. If missing included values are used.
- SuppressMessages=FALSE should messages be printed?
- B = 1000 number of simulation runs.

The data set power_studies_results included in MD2sample has the results for the included tests using a sample size of 200, a true type I error probability of 0.05 and two values of the parameter under the alternative, on which makes the null hypothesis true and one which makes it false. If the user wants different numbers he can run:

    run.studies(Continuous=TRUE,
                study=c("NormalD2", "tD2"),
                param_alt=cbind(c(0.4, 0.4), c(0.7, 0.7)),
                alpha=0.1, B=1000)

Say the new method can find p values without simulation:

Note that the routine should return a named vector with the p values.

    TSextra=list(which="pvalue", nbins=cbind(c(3,3), c(4,4)))
    run.studies(Continuous=TRUE,
                    study=c("NormalD2", "tD2"),
                    TS=chiTS.cont,
                    TSextra=TSextra,
                    With.p.value = TRUE,
                    B=500,
                    SuppressMessages = TRUE,
                    maxProcessor=1)
    #> Average number of times a test is close to best:
    #>             BG           Ball            CF2            NN0             KS
    #>            1.0            2.0            3.0            4.0            5.5
    #>            CF4            NN1              K             FR            CF1
    #>            6.0            7.5            8.5            9.5            9.5
    #>            CF3            CvM            NN5             AD             BF
    #>            9.5           12.0           13.0           14.0           15.0
    #>             AZ            MMD             ES             EP Chisq Pval 3,4
    #>           16.0           17.5           18.0           18.5           20.5
    #> Chisq Pval 3,4
    #>           20.5
    #>          Chisq Pval 3,4 Chisq Pval 3,4     KS      K    CvM     AD    NN1
    #> NormalD2          0.998          0.998 0.4277 0.4307 0.5571 0.6714 0.4560
    #> tD2               0.970          0.970 0.4398 0.4843 0.5612 0.6249 0.4408
    #>             NN5     AZ     BF     BG    MMD     FR    NN0    CF1    CF2    CF3
    #> NormalD2 0.6673 0.8807 0.8706 0.0536 0.9242 0.5490 0.3822 0.5490 0.3680 0.5490
    #> tD2      0.5915 0.8352 0.7189 0.0597 0.8766 0.4601 0.2902 0.4601 0.2811 0.4601
    #>             CF4   Ball     ES     EP
    #> NormalD2 0.4550 0.2619 0.9676 0.9575
    #> tD2      0.3832 0.2174 0.8746 0.9333

## Goodness-of-fit / twosample hybrid problem.

Consider the following situation. We have a data set \(x\) and want to test whether it comes from some probability distribution F, that is, we have a goodness-of-fit problem. However, it is not possible to calculate probabilities from \(F\), probably because this would require integration in high dimensions. We are, though, able to generate a second data set \(y\) under \(F\), and so can run a twosample test.

It can be shown that if the model \(F\) is not fully specified but includes parameters that have to be estimated from \(x\), finding p values using the permutation method leads to an extremely conservative tests, that is, the true type I error probability is much smaller than the desired one. Instead one can use a parametric bootstrap approach, that is a new data set \(y\) can be generated in each simulation run.

### Example 5

Let’s say we wish to test whether the data set \(x\) comes from a multivariate normal distribution with unknown mean and covariance:

    f=function(a) {
        x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(500, c(0.5, 0.5))
        y=rbind(matrix(runif(a*1000), ncol=2),
                mvtnorm::rmvnorm((1-a)*500, c(0.5,0.5)))
        list(x=x, y=y)
    }
    rnull=function(dta) {
      muhat=apply(dta$x, 2, mean)
      sigmahat=cor(dta$x)
      list(x=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(nrow(dta$x), muhat, sigmahat),
           y=mvtnorm::rmvnorm(nrow(dta$y), muhat, sigmahat))
    }

    dta=f(0) # Null hypothesis is true
    twosample_test(dta, rnull=rnull, B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be continuous
    #> $statistics
    #>       KS        K      CvM       AD      NN1      NN5       AZ       BF
    #> 0.070000 0.116000 0.136500 0.821800 0.990000 2.026000 0.000000 0.206900
    #>       BG      MMD
    #> 0.017320 0.004482
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #>   KS    K  CvM   AD  NN1  NN5   AZ   BF   BG  MMD
    #> 0.30 0.25 0.34 0.52 0.58 0.31 0.44 0.64 0.68 0.26

    dta=f(0.2) # Null hypothesis is false
    twosample_test(dta, rnull=rnull, B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)
    #> Data is assumed to be continuous
    #> $statistics
    #>      KS       K     CvM      AD     NN1     NN5      AZ      BF      BG     MMD
    #> 0.16800 0.23600 0.68990 3.27180 1.08200 2.07200 0.01616 0.82110 2.88700 0.01959
    #>
    #> $p.values
    #>   KS    K  CvM   AD  NN1  NN5   AZ   BF   BG  MMD
    #> 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00

Again we can find adjusted p values:

    twosample_test_adjusted_pvalue(dta, rnull=rnull,
                                   B=BT, maxProcessor = 1)

and find the power of the tests:

    twosample_power(f, c(0, 0.5), rnull=rnull, B=BP, maxProcessor=1)

## Methods included in MD2sample for continuous data

### Methods whose p values are found via simulation

#### Methods based on empirical distribution functions

Denote by \(\mathbf{z}\) the combined data set \(x_1,..,x_n,y_1,..y_m\). Let \(\hat{F}\) and \(\hat{G}\) be the empirical distribution functions of the two data sets, and let \(\hat{H}\) be the empirical distribution function of \(\mathbf{z}\)

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test

This classic test uses the test statistic

\[\max\{\vert \hat{F}(z_i)-\hat{G}(z_i)\vert;z_1,..,z_{n+m}\}\]

It was first proposed in (Kolmogorov 1933) and (Smirnov 1939).

Kiuper’s test

A variant of Kolmorogov-Smirnov:

\[\max\{\hat{F}(z_i)-\hat{G}(z_i);z_1,..,z_{n+m}\}-\min\{ \hat{F}(z_i)-\hat{G}(z_i);z_1,..,z_{n+m}\}\] This test was first discussed in (Kuiper 1960).

Cramer-vonMises test

\[\sum_{i=1}^{n+m} \left(\hat{F}(z_i)-\hat{G}(z_i)\right)^2\] the extension to the two-sample problem of the Cramer-vonMises criterion is discussed in (T. W. Anderson 1962).

Anderson-Darling test

\[\sum_{i=1}^{n+m} \frac{\left(\hat{F}(z_i)-\hat{G}(z_i)\right)^2}{\hat{H}(z_i)(1-\hat{H}(z_i))}\] It was first proposed in (Theodore W. Anderson, Darling, et al. 1952).

#### Methods based on nearest neighbors

The test statistics are the average number of nearest neighbors of the \(\mathbf{x}\) data set that are also from \(\mathbf{x}\) plus the average number of nearest neighbors of the \(\mathbf{y}\) data set that are also from \(\mathbf{y}\). NN1 uses one nearest neighbor and \(NN5\) uses 5.

#### Methods based on distances between observations

We denote by \(||.||\) Euclidean distance

Aslan-Zech test

This test discussed in (Aslan and and 2005) uses the test statistic

\[ \begin{aligned} &\frac{1}{nm}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^m \log(||x_i-y_j||) -\\ &\frac{1}{n^2}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{i<j} \log(||x_i-x_j||) - \\ &\frac{1}{m^2}\sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{i<j} \log(||y_i-y_j||) \end{aligned} \] Baringhaus-Franz test

Similar to the Aslan-Zech test, it uses the test statistic

\[ \begin{aligned} &\frac{nm}{n+m}\left[\frac{1}{nm}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^m \sqrt{||x_i-y_j||} + \right.\\ &\frac{1}{n^2}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{i<j} \sqrt{||x_i-x_j||} -\\ &\left. \frac{1}{m^2}\sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{i<j} \sqrt{||y_i-y_j||} \right]\\ \end{aligned} \] and was first proposed in (Baringhaus and Franz 2004).

Biswas-Ghosh test

Another variation of test based on Euclidean distance was discussed in (Biswas and Ghosh 2014).

\[ \begin{aligned} &B_{xy} = \frac{1}{nm}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^m \sqrt{||x_i-y_j||} \\ &B_{xx}= \frac{2}{n(n-1)}\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{i<j} \sqrt{||x_i-x_j||} \\ &B_{yy}=\frac{2}{m(m-1)}\sum_{i=1}^m \sum_{i<j} \sqrt{||y_i-y_j||}\\ &\left(B_{xx}-B_{xy}\right)^2+\left(B_{yy}-B_{xy}\right)^2 \end{aligned} \]

### Methods based on kernel density estimates

Aggregated Maximum Mean Discrepancy test

This test is based on a measure of difference between the kernel density estimates of the two data sets, using a number of different kernel bandwidths. For details see (Schrab et al. 2023).

### Methods whose p values are found using a large sample theory

Friedman-Rafski test

This test is a multi-dimensional extension of the classic Wald-Wolfowitz test bases on minimum spanning trees. It was discussed in (Friedman and Rafsky 1979).

Simple Nearest Neighboor test

Similar to the nearest neigboor tests described earlier, it uses only the number of nearest neighbors of the first data set that are also from the first data set. This number has a binomial distribution, and this can be used to find p values.

Chen-Friedman tests

These tests, discussed in (Chen and Friedman, n.d.), are implemented in the gTests (Chen and Zhang 2017) package.

Ball Divergence test

A test described in (Pan et al. 2018) and implemented in the R package (Zhu et al. 2021).

## Methods included in MD2sample for discrete data

Implemented for discrete data are versions of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Kuiper, Cramer-vonMises, Anderson-Darling, nearest neighboor, Aslan-Zech, Baringhaus-Franz tests as well as a chisquare test.

# References

Anderson, T. W. 1962. “On the Distribution of the Two_sample Cramer-von Mises Criterion.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33(3): 1148–59.
Anderson, Theodore W, Donald A Darling, et al. 1952. “Asymptotic Theory of Certain Goodness of Fit Criteria Based on Stochastic Processes.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 23 (2): 193–212.
Aslan, B., and G. Zech and. 2005. “New Test for the Multivariate Two-Sample Problem Based on the Concept of Minimum Energy.” Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 75 (2): 109–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00949650410001661440.
Baringhaus, L., and C. Franz. 2004. “On a New Multivariate Ttwo-Sample Test.” Journal of Multivariate Analysis 88: 190–206.
Biswas, M., and A. Ghosh. 2014. “A Nonparametric Two-Sample Test Applicable to High Dimensional Data.” Journal of Multivariate Analysis 123: 160–71.
Chen, H., and J. H. Friedman. n.d. “A New Graph-Based Two-Sample Test for Multivariate and Object Data.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 112: 397–409.
Chen, H., and J. Zhang. 2017. gTests: Graph-Based Two-Sample Tests. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=gTests.
Friedman, J. H., and L. C. Rafsky. 1979. “Multivariate Generalizations of the Wald-Wolfowitz and Smirnov Two-Sample Tests.” The Annals of Statistics 7 (4). https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344722.
Kolmogorov, A. N. 1933. “Sulla Determinazione Empirica Di Una Legge Di Distribuzione.” Giornale Dell’Instituto Italiano Degli Attuari 4: 83–91.
Kuiper, N. H. 1960. “Tests Concerning Random Points on a Circle.” Proceedings of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen 63: 38–47.
Pan, W., Y. Tian, X. Wang, and H. Zhang. 2018. “Ball Divergence: Nonparametric Two Sample Test.” The Annals of Statistics 46 (3). https://doi.org/10.1214/17-aos1579.
Schrab, Antonin, Ilmin Kim, Melisande Albert, Beatrice Laurent, Benjamin Guedj, and Arthur Gretton. 2023. “MMD Aggregated Two Sample Test.” Journal of Machine Learning 24 (194): 1–81.
Smirnov, N. V. 1939. “Estimate of Deviation Between Empirical Distribution Functions in Two Independent Samples.” Bull. Moscow Univ. 2: 3–16.
Zhu, J., W. Pan, W. Zheng, and X. Wang. 2021. “Ball: An R Package for Detecting Distribution Difference and Association in Metric Spaces.” Journal of Statistical Software 97 (6): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v097.i06.