It is well known that an up-and-down method can be more efficient than fixed-sample methods in estimating the LD50 of a quantal response curve. A problem that has not been addressed by many is that of obtaining a confidence interval for the LD50 from the up-and-down method. Dixon and Mood (1948, Journal of the American Statistical Association 43, 109-126) proposed a confidence interval using a maximum likelihood approach, but not much is known about its properties. In this paper, a new confidence interval for the LD50 based on turning points is obtained, which uses the concept of φ-mixing. Simulation results indicate that the coverage probabilities of both methods tend to be less than the nominal level unless the sample size is large. Even so, when the tolerance distribution is normal, the proposed confidence interval is found to be superior to Dixon's interval in terms of the coverage, the width, and stability. The advantages of the method do not appear to hold in the presence of nonnormal tolerance distribution.
Biometrics is a scientific journal emphasizing the role of statistics and mathematics in the biological sciences. Its object is to promote and extend the use of mathematical and statistical methods in pure and applied biological sciences by describing developments in these methods and their applications in a form readily assimilable by experimental scientists. JSTOR provides a digital archive of the print version of Biometrics. The electronic version of Biometrics is available at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=showIssues&code;=biom. Authorized users may be able to access the full text articles at this site.
The International Biometric Society is an international society for the advancement of biological science through the development of quantitative theories and the application, development and dissemination of effective mathematical and statistical techniques. The Society welcomes as members biologists, mathematicians, statisticians, and others interested in applying similar techniques.
This item is part of JSTOR collection
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Biometrics
© 1990 International Biometric Society
Request Permissions
