Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:34:58.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Classes of Equivalence and Identifiability of Age-Dependent Branching Processes

Part of: Markov processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2016

Rui Chen  and
Ollivier Hyrien
Rui Chen*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Ollivier Hyrien*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
*
∗ Postal address: Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
∗ Postal address: Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14642, USA.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Age-dependent branching processes are increasingly used in analyses of biological data. Despite being central to most statistical procedures, the identifiability of these models has not been studied. In this paper we partition a family of age-dependent branching processes into equivalence classes over which the distribution of the population size remains identical. This result can be used to study identifiability of the offspring and lifespan distributions for parametric families of branching processes. For example, we identify classes of Markov processes that are not identifiable. We show that age-dependent processes with (nonexponential) gamma-distributed lifespans are identifiable and that Smith-Martin processes are not always identifiable.

Keywords

IdentifiabilityBellman-Harris processSevastyanov processSmith-Martin process

MSC classification

Primary: 60J80: Branching processes (Galton-Watson, birth-and-death, etc.)
Secondary: 60J85: Applications of branching processes
Type
General Applied Probability
Information
Advances in Applied Probability , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 704 - 718
Copyright
© Applied Probability Trust 

References

Gyllenberg, M. and Webb, G. F. (1990). A nonlinear structured population model of tumor growth with quiescence. J. Math. Biol. 28, 671–694.Google Scholar
Haccou, P., Jagers, P. and Vatutin, V. A. (2007). Branching Processes: Variation, Growth, and Extinction of Populations. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyrien, O., Mayer-Pröschel, M., Noble, M. and Yakovlev, A. (2005). A stochastic model to analyze clonal data on multi-type cell populations. Biometrics 61, 199–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jagers, P. (1975). Branching Processes with Biological Applications. John Wiley, London.Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. and Axelrod, D. E. (2002). Branching Processes in Biology. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
Redner, R. (1981). Note on the consistency of the maximum likelihood estimate for nonidentifiable distributions. Ann. Statist. 9, 225–228.Google Scholar
Sevastyanov, B. A. (1971). Branching Processes. Nauka, Moscow (in Russian).Google Scholar
Smith, J. A. and Martin, L. (1973). Do cells cycle? Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 70, 1263–1267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yakovlev, A. Y. and Yanev, N. M. (1989). Transient Processes in Cell Proliferation Kinetics. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar