Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Another look at the Lady Tasting Tea and differences between permutation tests and randomization tests

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1912.02633 v2 pith:STNW3HO5 submitted 2019-12-05 stat.ME

classification stat.ME
keywords testrandomizationpermutationtestsclassesgroupdifferencesexperimental
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The statistical literature is known to be inconsistent in the use of the terms "permutation test" and "randomization test". Several authors succesfully argue that these terms should be used to refer to two distinct classes of tests and that there are major conceptual differences between these classes. The present paper explains an important difference in mathematical reasoning between these classes: a permutation test fundamentally requires that the set of permutations has a group structure, in the algebraic sense; the reasoning behind a randomization test is not based on such a group structure and it is possible to use an experimental design that does not correspond to a group. In particular, we can use a randomization scheme where the number of possible treatment patterns is larger than in standard experimental designs. This leads to exact \emph{p}-values of improved resolution, providing increased power for very small significance levels, at the cost of decreased power for larger significance levels. We discuss applications in randomized trials and elsewhere. Further, we explain that Fisher's famous Lady Tasting Tea experiment, which is commonly referred to as the first permutation test, is in fact a randomization test. This distinction is important to avoid confusion and invalid tests.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Optimal Designs with Robust Inference for Binary Treatment Effects

    stat.ME 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Balanced designs that balance covariates (especially blocking) are asymptotically variance-optimal for binary ATE under Neyman's nonparametric model, and a CMH-based variance estimator is finite-sample conservative an...

Pith tools