Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 531

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

K-Sample Anderson–Darling Tests

Scholz, F. W., Stephens, M. A.·1987·Journal of the American Statistical Association

Abstract

Two k-sample versions of an Anderson–Darling rank statistic are proposed for testing the homogeneity of samples. Their asymptotic null distributions are derived for the continuous as well as the discrete case. In the continuous case the asymptotic distributions coincide with the (k – 1)-fold convolution of the asymptotic distribution for the Anderson–Darling one-sample statistic. The quality of this large sample approximation is investigated for small samples through Monte Carlo simulation. This is done for both versions of the statistic under various degrees of data rounding and sample size imbalances. Tables for carrying out these tests are provided, and their usage in combining independent one- or k-sample Anderson–Darling tests is pointed out. The test statistics are essentially based on a doubly weighted sum of integrated squared differences between the empirical distribution functions of the individual samples and that of the pooled sample. One weighting adjusts for the possibly different sample sizes, and the other is inside the integration placing more weight on tail differences of the compared distributions. The two versions differ mainly in the definition of the empirical distribution function. These tests are consistent against all alternatives. The use of these tests is two-fold: (a) in a one-way analysis of variance to establish differences in the sampled populations without making any restrictive parametric assumptions or (b) to justify the pooling of separate samples for increased sample size and power in further analyses. Exact finite sample mean and variance formulas for one of the two statistics are derived in the continuous case. It appears that the asymptotic standardized percentiles serve well as approximate critical points of the appropriately standardized statistics for individual sample sizes as low as 5. The application of the tests is illustrated with an example. Because of the convolution nature of the asymptotic distribution, a further use of these critical points is possible in combining independent Anderson–Darling tests by simply adding their test statistics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01621459.1987.10478517

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 531

Metadata

Authors
Scholz, F. W., & Stephens, M. A.
Venue
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Published
1987-09
Volume
82
Issue
399
Pages
918-924
ISSN
  • 0162-1459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-274X
OpenAlex
W2009953698
Cited by
531
References
22
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: K-Sample Anderson–Darling Tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01621459.1987.10478517
The paper
Scholz, F. W., & Stephens, M. A. (1987). K-Sample Anderson–Darling Tests. Journal of the American Statistical Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1987.10478517

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.