Online control of the false discovery rate with decaying memory
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the online multiple testing problem, p-values corresponding to different null hypotheses are observed one by one, and the decision of whether or not to reject the current hypothesis must be made immediately, after which the next p-value is observed. Alpha-investing algorithms to control the false discovery rate (FDR), formulated by Foster and Stine, have been generalized and applied to many settings, including quality-preserving databases in science and multiple A/B or multi-armed bandit tests for internet commerce. This paper improves the class of generalized alpha-investing algorithms (GAI) in four ways: (a) we show how to uniformly improve the power of the entire class of monotone GAI procedures by awarding more alpha-wealth for each rejection, giving a win-win resolution to a recent dilemma raised by Javanmard and Montanari, (b) we demonstrate how to incorporate prior weights to indicate domain knowledge of which hypotheses are likely to be non-null, (c) we allow for differing penalties for false discoveries to indicate that some hypotheses may be more important than others, (d) we define a new quantity called the decaying memory false discovery rate (mem-FDR) that may be more meaningful for truly temporal applications, and which alleviates problems that we describe and refer to as "piggybacking" and "alpha-death". Our GAI++ algorithms incorporate all four generalizations simultaneously, and reduce to more powerful variants of earlier algorithms when the weights and decay are all set to unity. Finally, we also describe a simple method to derive new online FDR rules based on an estimated false discovery proportion.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 4; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
11 papers.
- 2021Online false discovery rate control for anomaly detection in time seriescited by 13
- 2026PACE: Anytime-Valid Acceptance Tests for Self-Evolving Agentscited by 13
- 2021Conformal Anomaly Detection on Spatio-Temporal Observations with Missing Datacited by 12
- 2023Online multiple testing with e-valuescited by 12
- 2022QuTE: decentralized multiple testing on sensor networks with false discovery rate controlcited by 2
- 2021Online Control of the False Discovery Rate under "Decision Deadlines"cited by 1
- 2021Online False Discovery Rate Control for LORD & SAFFRON Under Positive, Local Dependencecited by 1
- 2025Structural Enforcement of Statistical Rigor in AI-Driven Discovery: A Functional Architecturecited by 1
- 2022Cost-aware Generalized α-investing for Multiple Hypothesis Testingcited by 0
- 2025Online Conformal Anomaly Detection with Prediction-Powered Data Acquisitioncited by 0
- 2026A Regret Perspective on Online Multiple Testingcited by 0
- 2026PACE: Anytime-Valid Acceptance Tests for Self-Evolving Agents6 Jun 2026
- 2026A Regret Perspective on Online Multiple Testing13 May 2026
- 2025Structural Enforcement of Statistical Rigor in AI-Driven Discovery: A Functional Architecture10 Nov 2025
- 2025Online Conformal Anomaly Detection with Prediction-Powered Data Acquisition3 May 2025
- 2023Online multiple testing with e-values10 Nov 2023
- 2022Cost-aware Generalized α-investing for Multiple Hypothesis Testing31 Oct 2022
- 2022QuTE: decentralized multiple testing on sensor networks with false discovery rate control9 Oct 2022
- 2021Online false discovery rate control for anomaly detection in time series6 Dec 2021
- 2021Online False Discovery Rate Control for LORD & SAFFRON Under Positive, Local Dependence15 Oct 2021
- 2021Online Control of the False Discovery Rate under "Decision Deadlines"4 Oct 2021
- 2021Conformal Anomaly Detection on Spatio-Temporal Observations with Missing Data25 May 2021