Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 6, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
For a given data distribution $(X_t)_{t \in \mathbb{N}} \sim Q$ i.i.d., we investigate the hypothesis testing problem: $H_0: Q = P_0$ vs. $H_1: Q = P_1$, for two different model probability distributions $P_0$ and $P_1$. In contrast to the standard setting, where analytic densities $p_0$ and $p_1$ are given, here, we consider the density-free setting, where we only have access to i.i.d. simulations $(Z^0_t)_{t \in \mathbb{N}} \sim P_0$ and $(Z^1_t)_{t \in \mathbb{N}} \sim P_1$. For this simulation-based hypothesis testing setting, we construct an e-test martingale, resulting in a sequential test with anytime-valid type-I error guarantees, approximate growth optimality, geometrically decaying type-II error bounds, and asymptotic power one. Most ingredients used in our constructions are variants of well known concepts. The value of this paper lies in the compact presentation of an effective, anytime-valid solution for the density-free simulation-based sequential hypothesis testing case.