Asymptotic Optimality Theory of Confidence Intervals of the Mean

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2501.19126
• Title: Asymptotic optimality theory of confidence intervals of the mean
• Authors: Vikas Deep (NUS, Singapore), Achal Bassamboo (Kellogg, Northwestern University), Sandeep Juneja (Ashoka University, India)
• Classification: math.ST stat.TH
• Publication Date: January 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.19126

Abstract

This paper investigates the classical problem of constructing confidence intervals (CI) for the mean of a distribution based on N independent and identically distributed samples, requiring that the CI contains the true mean with probability at least 1-δ. Based on the minimum asymptotic width achievable by any CI as N_δ→∞ and δ→0, the authors characterize three distinct learning regimes: (1) No-learning regime: when N_δ grows slower than log(1/δ), the limiting width of the CI equals the width of the distribution's support; (2) Sufficient-learning regime: when N_δ grows proportionally to log(1/δ), the minimum limiting width can be precisely characterized depending on scaling constants; (3) Complete-learning regime: when N_δ grows faster than log(1/δ), the limiting width of the CI converges to zero. The authors prove that CIs constructed using concentration inequalities based on KL divergence achieve asymptotic optimality in both the sufficient-learning and complete-learning regimes.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Importance

Confidence interval construction is a fundamental problem in statistics with important applications in A/B testing, experimental design, data analysis, and simulation. Although multiple methods for constructing confidence intervals exist, there is a lack of theoretical characterization of optimal CIs with minimum width.

Limitations of Existing Methods

1. Lack of optimality theory: While the literature provides various CI construction methods, no results characterize optimal CIs with minimum width
2. Loose non-asymptotic bounds: Existing non-asymptotic lower bounds (e.g., Shekhar and Ramdas 2023) are loose in the asymptotic setting
3. Strong assumptions: Existing bounds rely on strong assumptions that CI width is deterministically bounded by specific functions

Research Motivation

This paper aims to fill this theoretical gap by introducing a stability assumption to characterize fundamental limits of CI width in an asymptotic framework and prove the optimality of KL divergence-based methods.

Core Contributions

1. Characterization of three learning regimes: Based on the relative scaling of sample size N_δ relative to precision 1-δ, the authors characterize three distinct regimes: no-learning, sufficient-learning, and complete-learning
2. Sharp lower bounds: Derive sharp lower bounds for the limiting width of CIs in the sufficient-learning regime and prove that KL divergence-based CI construction methods achieve these bounds
3. Asymptotic optimality proof: Prove that CI construction methods based on KL divergence concentration bounds are optimal in the studied asymptotic framework
4. Extended results: Extend results to more general settings including random sampling costs, one-sided CIs, and non-parametric distributions

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Given N independent and identically distributed samples X₁,...,X_N from distribution ν with mean μ, construct a confidence interval μ̂_L^π(N,δ), μ̂_R^π(N,δ) such that P_ν(μ ∈ μ̂_L^π(N,δ), μ̂_R^π(N,δ)) ≥ 1-δ.

Core Theoretical Framework

1. Stability Assumption

Definition 1 (Stability): For a given distribution ν, a strategy π is called stable if as N_δ→∞ and δ→0:

• lim_{δ→0} μ̂_L^π(N_δ,δ) →^p μ_L^π(ν)
• lim_{δ→0} μ̂_R^π(N_δ,δ) →^p μ_R^π(ν)

where μ_L^π(ν) ≤ μ and μ_R^π(ν) ≥ μ are constants.

2. Three Learning Regimes

Based on the value k = lim_{δ→0} N_δ/log(1/δ):

No-learning regime (k→0):

• CI limiting width = distribution support width
• μ_L^π(μ) = μ̲, μ_R^π(μ) = μ̄

Sufficient-learning regime (k ∈ (0,∞)):

• Lower bound: μ_R^π(μ) - μ_L^π(μ) ≥ μ_R*(μ,k) - μ_L*(μ,k)
• where μ_L*(μ,k) < μ and μ_R*(μ,k) > μ uniquely satisfy: d(μ, μ_R*(μ,k)) = d(μ, μ_L*(μ,k)) = 1/k

Complete-learning regime (k→∞):

• CI limiting width → 0

3. KL Divergence Function

For distributions in single-parameter exponential family S, define: d(μ, μ̃) = KL(p_{θ(μ)}, p_{θ(μ̃)}) = b(θ(μ̃)) - b(θ(μ)) - b'(θ(μ))(θ(μ̃) - θ(μ))

This function possesses key properties such as strict quasi-convexity and continuity.

Optimal CI Construction Method π₁

Based on the concentration inequality: P_ν(nd(μ̂_n, μ) ≥ β(δ)) ≤ δ

where β(δ) = log(2/δ), construct CI:

• μ_R^{π₁}(n,δ) = max{q > μ̂_n : nd(μ̂_n, q) ≤ β(δ)}
• μ_L^{π₁}(n,δ) = min{q < μ̂_n : nd(μ̂_n, q) ≤ β(δ)}

Technical Innovations

1. Introduction of stability concept: This is a key innovation for analyzing asymptotic behavior of CI width, making the limiting width a deterministic constant
2. Clever application of data processing inequality: Combined with stability assumption, enables simultaneous consideration of hypothesis elimination on both sides
3. Tightness proof: Proves that the proposed lower bounds are tight, i.e., there exist methods that achieve the bounds

Experimental Setup

Datasets

• Bernoulli distribution: means 0.6 and 0.9
• Gaussian distribution: N(0,1) with known variance
• Pareto distribution: scale parameter x_m=1, shape parameter α=3

Evaluation Metrics

• Average CI width: average confidence interval width over 1000 independent datasets
• Coverage probability: frequency with which the confidence interval contains the true mean

Comparison Methods

1. Hoeffding-based CI: based on Hoeffding inequality
2. Empirical Bernstein (EB) CI: based on empirical Bernstein inequality
3. Betting-based hedged CI: based on betting method
4. Shekhar-Ramdas lower bound: existing theoretical lower bound

Implementation Details

• δ = 0.01 (Bernoulli experiments), δ = 0.05 (Pareto experiments)
• Sample sizes: N ∈ {2000, 3000}
• Discretization parameter: m ∈ {1000, 3000, 5000} (betting method)

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Theoretical Lower Bound Comparison

For the Gaussian case, the asymptotic lower bound in this paper is 2σ√(2/k), while the Shekhar-Ramdas bound is σ√(2/k), representing an improvement factor of 2.

2. CI Width Comparison (Bernoulli Distribution)

3. Heavy-tailed Distribution Results (Pareto)

Experimental Findings

1. Asymptotic advantage: The π₁ method performs excellently in large sample scenarios, particularly comparable to the betting method when N=3000
2. Computational efficiency: The π₁ method is more computationally efficient than the betting method
3. Theoretical verification: Experimental results verify the theoretically predicted improvement factor

Related Work

Classical Theory

• Duality between hypothesis testing and CI: Classical theory constructs CIs by inverting hypothesis tests
• UMP tests: Uniformly most powerful tests exist in parametric settings but are typically restricted to specific families (e.g., unbiased tests in exponential families)

Concentration Inequality Methods

• Hoeffding and Bernstein inequalities: applicable to bounded support distributions
• Chernoff bounds: applicable when MGF upper bounds are known
• Heavy-tailed distribution methods: using Markov and Chebyshev inequalities

Recent Advances

• Waudby-Smith and Ramdas (2024): transform CI construction into betting problems
• Shekhar and Ramdas (2023): first provide explicit lower bounds with distribution-dependent complexity terms, but relatively loose

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Complete theoretical characterization: First complete characterization of fundamental limits of CI width, identifying three distinct learning regimes
2. Optimal method: Prove that KL divergence-based CI construction methods are optimal in the asymptotic sense
3. Broad applicability: Results apply to parametric and non-parametric distribution families, as well as random cost settings

Limitations

1. Asymptotic nature: Results are primarily asymptotic with limited guidance for finite samples
2. Stability assumption: Although mild, this remains an additional assumption
3. Distribution family restrictions: Main results focus on exponential families and bounded support distributions

Future Directions

1. Non-asymptotic results: Develop more refined non-asymptotic theory
2. Other statistics: Extend to variance and quantile estimation
3. Multidimensional generalization: Consider confidence regions for multidimensional parameters

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Significant theoretical contribution: First complete theory of CI width optimality, filling an important theoretical gap
2. Significant technical innovation: Introduction of stability concept and clever application of data processing inequality have methodological value
3. Tight results: Not only provide lower bounds but also prove their achievability
4. Broad applicability: Extensions to random costs, one-sided CIs, and other practically relevant settings

Weaknesses

1. Limited experiments: Numerical experiments are relatively simple; could include more complex real-world datasets
2. Computational complexity: For non-parametric cases, computation of KL_inf may be complex
3. Finite sample performance: Theory is asymptotic; finite sample performance guarantees are not sufficiently strong

Impact

1. Theoretical impact: Provides new analytical framework for CI theory, expected to be widely cited
2. Practical value: Provides theoretical guidance for selecting CI methods in practical applications
3. Methodological contribution: Stability analysis methods may be applicable to other statistical inference problems

Applicable Scenarios

1. Large-sample statistical inference: Particularly suitable for applications with large sample sizes
2. Online experiments: A/B testing and other scenarios requiring reliable confidence intervals
3. Simulation studies: Random cost settings particularly suitable for simulation applications
4. Machine learning: Confidence interval construction in model performance evaluation

References

The paper cites important literature in statistics and machine learning, including:

• Hoeffding (1994): Classical work on probability inequalities
• Waudby-Smith & Ramdas (2024): Recent advances in betting methods
• Shekhar & Ramdas (2023): Related lower bound work
• Kaufmann & Koolen (2021): Anytime-valid concentration inequalities

This paper makes important contributions to confidence interval theory by introducing a new analytical framework that completely characterizes fundamental limits of CI width and proves the optimality of KL divergence methods. While primarily theoretical, it provides valuable guidance for practical applications.