Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:37:49.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A note on stochastic domination and conditional thinning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2016

Sandeep R. Shah*
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
*
Postal address: Department of Statistics, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK. Email address: [email protected]

Abstract

This note investigates the simulation algorithm proposed by van Lieshout and van Zwet (2001). It is seen that this algorithm generally produces biased samples; the nature of this bias is further explored in a technical report by the author.

Type
Stochastic Geometry and Statistical Applications
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 2003 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Carter, D. S. and Prenter, P. M. (1972). Exponential spaces and counting processes. Z. Wahrscheinlichkeitsth. 21, 119.Google Scholar
[2] Kamae, T., Krengel, U. and O'Brien, G. L. (1977). Stochastic inequalities on partially ordered spaces. Ann. Prob. 5, 899912.Google Scholar
[3] Preston, C. J. (1977). Spatial birth-and-death processes. Bull. Internat. Statist. Inst. 46, 371391.Google Scholar
[4] Shah, S. R. (2003). Stochastic domination and conditional thinning in spatial point processes. Tech. Rep. 412, Department of Statistics, University of Warwick.Google Scholar
[5] Shaked, M. and Shanthikumar, J. (1994). Stochastic Orders and Their Applications. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
[6] Van Lieshout, M. N. M. (2000). Markov Point Processes and Their Applications. Imperial College Press, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Van Lieshout, M. N. M. and van Zwet, E. W. (2001). Exact sampling from conditional Boolean models with applications to maximum likelihood inference. Adv. Appl. Prob. 33, 339353. Correction: 35 (2003), 362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar