Lang’s Multinomial-Poisson Homogeneous (MPH) models and Homogeneous Linear Predictor (HLP) Multinomial-Poisson models include as special cases many models for contingency table analysis that have been introduced in the effort to overcome well-known limitations of the log-linear models. Here the definitions of MPH and HLP models are extended to include inequality constraints. It is shown that inequality constrained MPH and HLP models are very flexible and rich family of models for contingency table analysis. The inequality constrained hierarchical multinomial marginal models which are an important sub-class of MPH models are also examined.
Agresti A
and
Coull BA
(1998)
Order-restricted inference for monotone trend alternatives in contingency tables
. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 28,
139–55
.
2.
Andrews DWK
(1999)
Estimation when a parameter is on a boundary
. Econometrica, 67,
1341–383
.
3.
Bartolucci F
,
Colombi R
and
Forcina A
(2007)
An extended class of marginal link functions for modelling contingency tables by equality and inequality constraints
. Statistica Sinica, 17,
691–711
.
4.
Bergsma WP
and
Rudas T
(2002)
Marginal models for categorical data
. Annals of Statistics, 30,
140–59
.
5.
Cazzaro M
and
Colombi R
(2006)
Maximum likelihood inference for log-linear models subject to constraints of double monotone dependence
. Statistical Methods and Applications, 15,
177–90
.
6.
Cazzaro M
and
Colombi R
(2007)
Modelling two way contingency tables with recursive logits and odds ratios
. Statistical Methods and Applications, 17,
435–53
.
7.
Colombi R
and
Forcina A
(2001)
Marginal regression models for the analysis of positive association of ordinal response variables
. Biometrika, 88,
1007–19
.
8.
Cox DR
and
Wermuth N
(1996) Multivariate dependencies: models, analysis and interpretation.
London: Chapman & Hall
.
9.
Dardanoni V
and
Forcina A
(1998)
A unified approach to likelihood inference on stochastic orderings in a nonparametric context
. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 93,
1112–123
.
10.
Glonek GFV
and
McCullagh P
(1995)
Multivariate logistic models for contingency tables
. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B Series, 57,
533–46
.
11.
Lang JB
(2004)
Multinomial Poisson homogeneous models for contingency tables
. The Annals of Statistics, 32,
340–83
.
12.
Lang JB
(2005)
Homogeneous linear predictor models for contingency tables
. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100,
121–34
.
13.
Madsen M
(1976)
Statistical analysis of multiple contingency tables-two examples
. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 3,
97–106
.
14.
R Development Core Team (2006), R: A language and environment for statistical computing.
Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computinghttp://www.R-project.org.
15.
Rao CR
(1973) Linear statistical inference and its application, 2nd edition.
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons
.
16.
Shaked M
and
Shanthikumar JG
(1994) Stochastic orders and their applications.
Boston, MA: Academic Press
.
17.
Silvapulle MJ
and
Sen PK
(2005) Constrained statistical inference.
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons
.
