Table 2.
Type I error rates of the different approaches for the large Worldwide sample.
| CAST | PC3 | LMM | LocPerm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A—No stratification | ||||
| RVs | 0.00085 | 0.00099 | 0.00093 | 0.00087 |
| LFVs | 0.00099 | 0.00094 | ||
| CVs | 0.00099 | 0.00093 | ||
| ALLVs | 0.00099 | 0.00093 | ||
| B—Moderate stratification | ||||
| RVs | 0.00681 | 0.00259 | 0.00456 | 0.00096 |
| LFVs | 0.00109 | 0.00123 | ||
| CVs | 0.00105 | 0.00117 | ||
| ALLVs | 0.00128 | 0.00162 | ||
| C—High stratification | ||||
| RVs | 0.13698 | 0.00662 | 0.01834 | 0.00113 |
| LFVs | 0.0012 | 0.00163 | ||
| CVs | 0.00119 | 0.00115 | ||
| ALLVs | 0.00127 | 0.00266 | ||
The nominal level alpha considered is and the corresponding 95%PI adjusted for the 10 methods is [0.00079–0.00121]. Type I error rates under the lower bound of the 95%PI are displayed in italic and above the upper bound of the 95%PI in bold.