Bonferroni-Free and Indifference-Zone-Flexible Sequential Elimination Procedures for Ranking and Selection

References

• Branke J, Chick SE, Schmidt C (2007) Selecting a selection procedure. Management Sci. 53(12):1916–1932.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen CH, Lin J, Yücesan E, Chick SE (2000) Simulation budget allocation for further enhancing the efficiency of ordinal optimization. Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 10(3):251–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chick SE, Inoue K (2001) New two-stage and sequential procedures for selecting the best simulated system. Oper. Res. 49(5):732–743.Link, Google Scholar
• Dieker AB, Kim SH (2014) A fully sequential procedure for known and equal variances based on multivariate Brownian motion. Tolk A, Diallo SY, Ryzhov IO, Yilmaz L, Buckley S, Miller JA, eds. Proc. Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 3749–3760.Google Scholar
• Dieker AB, Kim SH (2021) Efficient fully sequential indifference-zone procedures using properties of multidimensional Brownian motion exiting a sphere. Preprint, submitted April 18, https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.08784.Google Scholar
• Fan W, Hong LJ (2014) A frequentist selection-of-the-best procedure without indifference zone. Tolk A, Diallo SY, Ryzhov IO, Yilmaz L, Buckley S, Miller JA, eds. Proc. Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 3737–3748.Google Scholar
• Fan W, Hong LJ, Nelson BL (2016) Indifference-zone-free selection of the best. Oper. Res. 64(6):1499–1514.Link, Google Scholar
• Frazier PI (2014) A fully sequential elimination procedure for indifference-zone ranking and selection with tight bounds on probability of correct selection. Oper. Res. 62(4):926–942.Link, Google Scholar
• Gupta SS (1956) On a Decision Rule for a Problem in Ranking Means (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill).Google Scholar
• Gupta SS (1965) On some multiple decision (selection and ranking) rules. Technometrics 7(2):225–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong LJ, Fan W, Luo J (2021) Review on ranking and selection: A new perspective. Frontiers Engrg. Management 8(3):321–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johari R, Koomen P, Pekelis L, Walsh D (2019) Always valid inference: Continuous monitoring of A/B tests. Oper. Res. 70(3):1806–1821.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Nelson BL (2001) A fully sequential procedure for indifference-zone selection in simulation. ACM Trans. Modeling Comput. Simulation 11(3):251–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Nelson BL (2006a) On the asymptotic validity of fully sequential selection procedures for steady-state simulation. Oper. Res. 54(3):475–488.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Nelson BL (2006b) Selecting the best system. Henderson SG, Nelson BL, eds. Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, vol. 13 of Simulation (Elsevier, New York), 501–534.Google Scholar
• Kim SH, Nelson BL (2007) Recent advances in ranking and selection. Henderson SG, Biller B, Hsieh MH, Shortle J, Tew JD, Barton RR, eds. Proc. Winter Simulation Conf. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 162–172.Google Scholar
• Lai TL (1977) Power-one tests based on sample sums. Ann. Statist. 5(5):866–880.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lai TL (1981) Asymptotic optimality of invariant sequential probability ratio tests. Ann. Statist. 9(2):318–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li X, Liu J, Ying Z (2014) Generalized sequential probability ratio test for separate families of hypotheses. Sequential Anal. 33(4):539–563.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorden G (1976) 2-SPRT’s and the modified Kiefer-Weiss problem of minimizing an expected sample size. Ann. Statist. 4(2):281–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pavlov I (1988) A sequential procedure for testing many composite hypotheses. Theory Probability Appl. 32(1):138–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pavlov I (1991) Sequential procedure of testing composite hypotheses with applications to the Kiefer-Weiss problem. Theory Probability Appl. 35(2):280–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Revuz D, Yor M (1999) Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Robbins H, Siegmund D (1974) The expected sample size of some tests of power one. Ann. Statist. 2(3):415–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shafer G, Shen A, Vereshchagin N, Vovk V (2011) Test martingales, Bayes factors and p-values. Statist. Sci. 26(1):84–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegmund D (1976) Importance sampling in the Monte Carlo study of sequential tests. Ann. Statist. 4(4):673–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tartakovsky A, Nikiforov I, Basseville M (2014) Sequential Analysis: Hypothesis Testing and Changepoint Detection (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wald A (1945) Sequential method of sampling for deciding between two courses of action. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 40(231):277–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wald A, Wolfowitz J (1948) Optimum character of the sequential probability ratio test. Ann. Math. Statist. 19(3):326–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang H, Kim SH (2013) Reducing the conservativeness of fully sequential indifference-zone procedures. IEEE Trans. Automated Control 58(6):1613–1619.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasserman L, Ramdas A, Balakrishnan S (2020) Universal inference. Proc. National Acad. Sci. USA 117(29):16880–16890.Crossref, Google Scholar