The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strong Control, Conservative Point Estimation and Simultaneous Conservative Consistency of False Discovery Rates: A Unified Approach
Abstract
Summary: The false discovery rate (FDR) is a multiple hypothesis testing quantity that describes the expected proportion of false positive results among all rejected null hypotheses. Benjamini and Hochberg introduced this quantity and proved that a particular step-up p-value method controls the FDR. Storey introduced a point estimate of the FDR for fixed significance regions. The former approach conservatively controls the FDR at a fixed predetermined level, and the latter provides a conservatively biased estimate of the FDR for a fixed predetermined significance region. In this work, we show in both finite sample and asymptotic settings that the goals of the two approaches are essentially equivalent. In particular, the FDR point estimates can be used to define valid FDR controlling procedures. In the asymptotic setting, we also show that the point estimates can be used to estimate the FDR conservatively over all significance regions simultaneously, which is equivalent to controlling the FDR at all levels simultaneously. The main tool that we use is to translate existing FDR methods into procedures involving empirical processes. This simplifies finite sample proofs, provides a framework for asymptotic results and proves that these procedures are valid even under certain forms of dependence.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x · Cited by 109,482
The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency
Benjamini, Y., & Yekutieli, D. (2001) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1013699998 · Cited by 10,490
An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance
SIMES, R. J. (1986) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/73.3.751 · Cited by 2,396
Cited by
Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate
Benjamini, Y., Krieger, A. M., & Yekutieli, D. (2006) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/93.3.491 · Cited by 3,228
The positive false discovery rate: a Bayesian interpretation and the q-value
Storey, J. D. (2003) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1074290335 · Cited by 2,204
Self-citationMotulsky, H. J., & Brown, R. E. (2006) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-7-123 · Cited by 1,616
Harbord, R. M., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2008) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0800800403 · Cited by 897
Gao, X., Starmer, J., & Martin, E. R. (2008) · Genetic Epidemiology · doi:10.1002/gepi.20310 · Cited by 849
Metadata
- Authors
- Storey, J. D., Taylor, J. E., & Siegmund, D.
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-12-22
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 187-205
- ISSN
- 1369-7412 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9868
- OpenAlex
- W2146273335
- Cited by
- 1,388
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 38.47
- 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: Strong Control, Conservative Point Estimation and Simultaneous Conservative Consistency of False Discovery Rates: A Unified Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2004.00439.x
- The paper
- Storey, J. D., Taylor, J. E., & Siegmund, D. (2004). Strong Control, Conservative Point Estimation and Simultaneous Conservative Consistency of False Discovery Rates: A Unified Approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2004.00439.x
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.