The flexible delivery of single-frequency lasers is far more challenging than that of conventional lasers due to the onset of stimulated Brillouin scattering (SBS). Here we present the successful delivery of 100 W single-frequency laser power through 100 m of anti-resonant hollow-core fiber (AR-HCF) in an all-fiber configuration, with the absence of SBS. By employing a custom-designed AR-HCF with a mode-field diameter matching that of a large-mode-area panda fiber, the system achieves high coupling efficiency without the need for free-space components or fiber post-processing. The AR-HCF attains a transmission efficiency of 92%, delivering an output power of 100.3 W with a beam quality factor (M2) of 1.22. The absence of SBS is confirmed through monitoring backward light, which shows no increase in intensity. This all-fiber architecture ensures high stability, compactness and efficiency, potentially expanding the application scope of single-frequency lasers in high-precision metrology, optical communication, light detection and ranging systems, gravitational wave detection and other advanced applications.

In the Islamic tradition, there’s a long standing controversy over the relationship between God’s attributes and His essence, giving rise to diverse theories with significant theological implications. In one respect, these views are broadly categorizable into three: A1, the doctrine of divine complexity (DDC), A2, the doctrine of divine simplicity (DDS), and B, the doctrine of divine anonymity (DDA). The entry focuses on DDS, specifically explaining the Avicennian version, and defends it against some objections from some recent DDC proponents.

The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) has notably proven to be an effective tool in a broad range of scientific applications. Despite the well-documented literature about its principal uses and statistical properties, the corresponding power analysis for the general linear hypothesis tests of treatment differences remains a less discussed issue. The frequently recommended procedure is a direct application of the ANOVA formula in combination with a reduced degrees of freedom and a correlation-adjusted variance. This article aims to explicate the conceptual problems and practical limitations of the common method. An exact approach is proposed for power and sample size calculations in ANCOVA with random assignment and multinormal covariates. Both theoretical examination and numerical simulation are presented to justify the advantages of the suggested technique over the current formula. The improved solution is illustrated with an example regarding the comparative effectiveness of interventions. In order to facilitate the application of the described power and sample size calculations, accompanying computer programs are also presented.

Researchers in the field of conjoint analysis know the index-of-fit values worsen as the judgmental error of evaluation increases. This simulation study provides guidelines on the goodness of fit based on distribution of index-of-fit for different conjoint analysis designs. The study design included the following factors: number of profiles, number of attributes, algorithm used and judgmental model used. Critical values are provided for deciding the statistical significance of conjoint analysis results. Using these cumulative distributions, the power of the test used to reject the null hypothesis of random ranking is calculated. The test is found to be quite powerful except for the case of very small residual degrees of freedom.

Wu and Browne (Psychometrika 80(3):571–600, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-015-9451-3; henceforth W & B) introduced the notion of adventitious error to explicitly take into account approximate goodness of fit of covariance structure models (CSMs). Adventitious error supposes that observed covariance matrices are not directly sampled from a theoretical population covariance matrix but from an operational population covariance matrix. This operational matrix is randomly distorted from the theoretical matrix due to differences in study implementations. W & B showed how adventitious error is linked to the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and how the standard errors (SEs) of parameter estimates are augmented. Our contribution is to consider adventitious error as a general phenomenon and to illustrate its consequences. Using simulations, we illustrate that its impact on SEs can be generalized to pairwise relations between variables beyond the CSM context. Using derivations, we conjecture that heterogeneity of effect sizes across studies and overestimation of statistical power can both be interpreted as stemming from adventitious error. We also show that adventitious error, if it occurs, has an impact on the uncertainty of composite measurement outcomes such as factor scores and summed scores. The results of a simulation study show that the impact on measurement uncertainty is rather small although larger for factor scores than for summed scores. Adventitious error is an assumption about the data generating mechanism; the notion offers a statistical framework for understanding a broad range of phenomena, including approximate fit, varying research findings, heterogeneity of effects, and overestimates of power.

The study of prediction bias is important and the last five decades include research studies that examined whether test scores differentially predict academic or employment performance. Previous studies used ordinary least squares (OLS) to assess whether groups differ in intercepts and slopes. This study shows that OLS yields inaccurate inferences for prediction bias hypotheses. This paper builds upon the criterion-predictor factor model by demonstrating the effect of selection, measurement error, and measurement bias on prediction bias studies that use OLS. The range restricted, criterion-predictor factor model is used to compute Type I error and power rates associated with using regression to assess prediction bias hypotheses. In short, OLS is not capable of testing hypotheses about group differences in latent intercepts and slopes. Additionally, a theorem is presented which shows that researchers should not employ hierarchical regression to assess intercept differences with selected samples.

Tukey's scheme for finding separations in univariate data strings is described and tested. It is found that one can use the size of a data gap coupled with its ordinal position in the distribution to determine the likelihood of its having arisen by chance. It was also shown that this scheme is relatively robust for fatter-tailed-than-Gaussian distributions and has some interesting implications in multidimensional situations.

A person fit test based on the Lagrange multiplier test is presented for three item response theory models for polytomous items: the generalized partial credit model, the sequential model, and the graded response model. The test can also be used in the framework of multidimensional ability parameters. It is shown that the Lagrange multiplier statistic can take both the effects of estimation of the item parameters and the estimation of the person parameters into account. The Lagrange multiplier statistic has an asymptotic χ2-distribution. The Type I error rate and power are investigated using simulation studies. Results show that test statistics that ignore the effects of estimation of the persons’ ability parameters have decreased Type I error rates and power. Incorporating a correction to account for the effects of the estimation of the persons’ ability parameters results in acceptable Type I error rates and power characteristics; incorporating a correction for the estimation of the item parameters has very little additional effect. It is investigated to what extent the three models give comparable results, both in the simulation studies and in an example using data from the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised.

Data in social and behavioral sciences typically possess heavy tails. Structural equation modeling is commonly used in analyzing interrelations among variables of such data. Classical methods for structural equation modeling fit a proposed model to the sample covariance matrix, which can lead to very inefficient parameter estimates. By fitting a structural model to a robust covariance matrix for data with heavy tails, one generally gets more efficient parameter estimates. Because many robust procedures are available, we propose using the empirical efficiency of a set of invariant parameter estimates in identifying an optimal robust procedure. Within the class of elliptical distributions, analytical results show that the robust procedure leading to the most efficient parameter estimates also yields a most powerful test statistic. Examples illustrate the merit of the proposed procedure. The relevance of this procedure to data analysis in a broader context is noted.

Social scientists are frequently interested in assessing the qualities of social settings such as classrooms, schools, neighborhoods, or day care centers. The most common procedure requires observers to rate social interactions within these settings on multiple items and then to combine the item responses to obtain a summary measure of setting quality. A key aspect of the quality of such a summary measure is its reliability. In this paper we derive a confidence interval for reliability, a test for the hypothesis that the reliability meets a minimum standard, and the power of this test against alternative hypotheses. Next, we consider the problem of using data from a preliminary field study of the measurement procedure to inform the design of a later study that will test substantive hypotheses about the correlates of setting quality. The preliminary study is typically called the “generalizability study” or “G study” while the later, substantive study is called the “decision study” or “D study.” We show how to use data from the G study to estimate reliability, a confidence interval for the reliability, and the power of tests for the reliability of measurement produced under alternative designs for the D study. We conclude with a discussion of sample size requirements for G studies.

We investigate the performance of three statistics, R1, R2 (Glas in Psychometrika 53:525–546, 1988), and M2 (Maydeu-Olivares & Joe in J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 100:1009–1020, 2005, Psychometrika 71:713–732, 2006) to assess the overall fit of a one-parameter logistic model (1PL) estimated by (marginal) maximum likelihood (ML). R1 and R2 were specifically designed to target specific assumptions of Rasch models, whereas M2 is a general purpose test statistic. We report asymptotic power rates under some interesting violations of model assumptions (different item discrimination, presence of guessing, and multidimensionality) as well as empirical rejection rates for correctly specified models and some misspecified models. All three statistics were found to be more powerful than Pearson’s X2 against two- and three-parameter logistic alternatives (2PL and 3PL), and against multidimensional 1PL models. The results suggest that there is no clear advantage in using goodness-of-fit statistics specifically designed for Rasch-type models to test these models when marginal ML estimation is used.

Previous studies have found some puzzling power anomalies related to testing the indirect effect of a mediator. The power for the indirect effect stagnates and even declines as the size of the indirect effect increases. Furthermore, the power for the indirect effect can be much higher than the power for the total effect in a model where there is no direct effect and therefore the indirect effect is of the same magnitude as the total effect. In the presence of direct effect, the power for the indirect effect is often much higher than the power for the direct effect even when these two effects are of the same magnitude. In this study, the limiting distributions of related statistics and their non-centralities are derived. Computer simulations are conducted to demonstrate their validity. These theoretical results are used to explain the observed anomalies.