Geometric quantile-based measures of multivariate distributional characteristics

Abstract

Several new geometric quantile-based measures for multivariate dispersion, skewness, kurtosis, and spherical asymmetry are defined. These measures differ from existing measures, which use volumes and are easy to calculate. Some theoretical justification is given, followed by experiments illustrating that they are reasonable measures of these distributional characteristics and computing confidence regions with the desired coverage.

Keywords: Geometric quantiles, multivariate kurtosis, multivariate skewness, spherical symmetry

1 Introduction

Denote the open ball in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with center $p$ and radius $r$ by $B_{r}^{n}(p)$. Chaudhuri, (1996) defined a geometric notion of quantiles for multidimensional data by defining the $u$-quantile, $u\in B_{1}^{n}(0)$, to be the value of $p$ that minimizes $E[\lVert X-p\rVert+\langle u,X-p\rangle]$, which generalizes the univariate quantile loss function. However, a common criticism of these geometric quantiles is that the isoquantile contours need not follow the shape of the distribution very well when it is not spherically symmetric, especially for extreme quantiles, which also need not be contained in the convex hull of the distribution, as shown by Girard and Stupfler, (2017). To mitigate this problem, Chakraborty, (2003) devised a procedure to transform the data to have roughly isotropic covariance.

A potential use of geometric quantiles that does not need this procedure is in defining robust measures of multivariate centrality, dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis. For real-valued data, the first four moments are used to define measures of centrality, dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis, respectively. Meanwhile, some quantile-based measures of these quantities also exist in the literature. Denoting the $\tau$τたう-quantile for univariate data by $Q_{\tau}^{X}$τたう end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, $\tau\in(0,1)$τたう ∈ ( 0 , 1 ), the median $Q_{0.5}^{X}$ is a centrality measure, and

$$\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta):=Q_{(1+\beta)/2}^{X}-Q_{(1-\beta)/2}^{X}$$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) := italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 + italic_βべーた ) / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 - italic_βべーた ) / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

for $\beta\in(0,1)$βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) measures dispersion; this is the interquartile range when $\beta=1/2$βべーた = 1 / 2. A standard quantile-based measure of skewness is

$$\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta):=\frac{Q_{(1+\beta)/2}^{X}+Q_{(1-\beta)/2}^{X}-2Q_{1/2}^{X}}{\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)},$$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) := divide start_ARG italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 + italic_βべーた ) / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 - italic_βべーた ) / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG ,

where $\beta$βべーた is typically set to $1/2$ (Groeneveld and Meeden,, 1984), and kurtosis (or tailedness) can be measured by

$$\kappa_{0}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime}):=\frac{\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta^{\prime})}{\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)}$$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG

for $0<\beta<\beta^{\prime}<1$βべーた < italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < 1 (Balanda and MacGillivray,, 1988).

For multivariate data, Chaudhuri, (1996) defined measures of multivariate dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis using the volume of a region enclosed by an isoquantile contour, by which we mean the set of all $u$-quantiles for fixed $\lVert u\rVert\in(0,1)$. However, these measures are only briefly mentioned in that paper and are computationally complex for two reasons. First, since geometric quantiles cannot, in general, be found analytically, it is not feasible to have an exact description of an entire isoquantile contour as that would require numerically calculating the $u$-quantile for every $u\in B_{1}^{n}(0)$ of a given size. Second, computing the volume of the region enclosed by an arbitrary hypersurface is non-trivial even in just two dimensions, especially considering that the enclosed region may not be convex.

In Section 2, we define two new measures for each of these characteristics, one based on averages and the other on suprema, which bypass the second issue altogether by avoiding volumes, while circumventing the first one. Furthermore, we introduce a measure of spherical asymmetry and investigate some theoretical underpinnings of these measures. Section 3 describes the use of these measures and calculates confidence regions and coverage.

2 Quantile-based measures of multivariate dispersion, skewness, kurtosis, and spherical asymmetry

For an $n$-dimensional random vector $X$ with unique $u$-quantiles for all $u\in B_{1}^{n}(0)$, define a map $q^{X}:B_{1}^{n}(0)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{n}$ that sends $u$ to the $u$-quantile of $X$, and denote $q^{X}(0)$ by $m^{X}$. For such an $X$, we introduce two measures of dispersion as follows

$$\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta) :=\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}{\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-q^{X}(-\beta\xi)\rVert},$$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ∥ ,

$$\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta) :=\frac{1}{SA(n-1)}\int_{S^{n-1}}\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-q^{X}(-\beta\xi)\rVert d\xi,~{}~{}\beta\in(0,1),$$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ∥ italic_d italic_ξくしー , italic_βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) ,

where $SA(n-1)$ is the surface area of the unit $(n-1)$-sphere. For skewness, we suggest the following two measures

$$\gamma_{1}^{X}(\beta) :=\frac{\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)+q^{X}(-\beta\xi)-2m^{X}\rVert}{\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta)},$$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) + italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - 2 italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG ,

$$\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta) :=\frac{\int_{S^{n-1}}(q^{X}(\beta\xi)-m^{X})d\xi/SA(n-1)}{\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta)},~{}~{}\beta\in(0,1),$$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_ξくしー / italic_S italic_A ( italic_n - 1 ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG , italic_βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) ,

and for kurtosis,

$$\kappa_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime}):=\frac{\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta^{\prime})}{\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta)}~{}~{}~{}\mbox{and}~{}~{}~{}\kappa_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime}):=\frac{\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta^{\prime})}{\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta)},$$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG and italic_κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) end_ARG ,

for $0<\beta<\beta^{\prime}<1$βべーた < italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < 1. When $n=1$, it is clear that $\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)=\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta)=\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), $\lvert\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)\rvert=\gamma_{1}^{X}(\beta)=\lvert\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta)\rvert$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) | = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = | italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) |, and $\kappa_{0}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=\kappa_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=\kappa_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ). Unlike $\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and $\kappa_{0}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), $\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) can be positive or negative, so its generalization to higher dimensions should be a vector as $\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) is. However, we have also included $\gamma_{1}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), which is a scalar and thus, strictly speaking, generalizes $\lvert\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)\rvert$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) | rather than $\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) itself.

Under the following assumption, Fact 2.1.1 of Chaudhuri, (1996) guarantees that a unique $u$-quantile of $X$ exist for all $u\in B_{1}^{n}(0)$.

Assumption 2.1.

The support of the $n$-dimensional random vector $X$, $n\geq 2$, is not contained on a single line.

Proposition 6.1 in Konen and Paindaveine, (2022) shows that for such an $X$, $q^{X}$ is continuous. In the rest of this section, we assume that $X$ satisfies Assumption 2.1.

We now consider the spherical asymmetry of a distribution, which is a relevant property for multivariate distributions. We propose the spherical asymmetry of a distribution as

$$\alpha^{X}(\beta):=\log\bigg{(}\frac{\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-m^{X}\rVert}{\inf_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-m^{X}\rVert}\bigg{)}.$$αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) := roman_log ( divide start_ARG roman_sup start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG start_ARG roman_inf start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG ) .

By transforming the data as in Chakraborty, (2001) to have roughly isotropic covariance, $\alpha^{X}(\beta)$αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) can also be used to measure elliptical asymmetry. All of our measures can be used to test properties of distributions, such as whether a distribution is skewed or spherically symmetric or whether one distribution is more spread out than another.

Note that all of the integrands used to define these measures are continuous thanks to Assumption 2.1 and thus have finite integrals because the domain of integration is the compact $S^{n-1}$. Next, consider the following two assumptions.

Assumption 2.2.

There exists some $\xi\in S^{n-1}$ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for which $q^{X}(\beta\xi)\neq q^{X}(-\beta\xi)$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ≠ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ).

Assumption 2.3.

For all $\xi\in S^{n-1}$ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, $q^{X}(\beta\xi)\neq m^{X}$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ≠ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Clearly $\gamma_{1}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and $\kappa_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) are defined in $\mathbb{R}$ if and only if Assumption 2.2 holds. In fact, $\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and $\kappa_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) are defined in $\mathbb{R}$ under the same condition and only under this condition since the continuity of $q^{X}$ implies that the map $\xi\mapsto\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-q^{X}(-\beta\xi)\rVert$ξくしー ↦ ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ∥ is positive on a non-null set (according to the standard volume measure on $S^{n-1}$). On the other hand, $\alpha(\beta)$αあるふぁ ( italic_βべーた ) is defined in $\mathbb{R}$ if and only if Assumption 2.3 holds. Both of these assumptions can be guaranteed when $X$ has a non-atomic distribution not supported on a single line, in which case $q^{X}$ is a homeomorphism and hence injective; see Theorem 6.2 in Konen and Paindaveine, (2022).

$X$ is said to have a non-skewed distribution if $X-m^{X}$ and $-(X-m^{X})$ have identical distributions and a spherically symmetric distribution if $X-m^{X}$ and $A(X-m^{X})$ have identical distributions for all orthogonal $n\times n$ matrices $A$. Then, we can show that the skewness and spherical asymmetry measures behave as desired when the distribution of $X$ is non-skewed or spherically symmetric, respectively. We can also show that our measures have desirable invariance and equivariance properties with respect to scaling, translation, and orthogonal transformations like rotation and reflection.

Proposition 2.1.

Let $\beta\in(0,1)$βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) and Assumption 2.1 hold for $X=Y$.

• If $Y$ has a non-skewed distribution, then under Assumption 2.2 for $X=Y$, $\gamma_{1}^{Y}(\beta)=\gamma_{2}^{Y}(\beta)=0$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = 0.

• If $Y$ has a spherically symmetric distribution, then under Assumption 2.3 for $X=Y$, $\alpha^{Y}(\beta)=0$αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = 0.

• Let $A$ be an orthogonal $n\times n$ matrix, $c>0$, and $v\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$. Then, $\delta_{1}^{cAY+v}(\beta)=c\delta_{1}^{Y}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_c italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and $\delta_{2}^{cAY+v}(\beta)=c\delta_{2}^{Y}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_c italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ). Under Assumption 2.2 for $X=Y$, $\gamma_{1}^{cAY+v}(\beta)=\gamma_{1}^{Y}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), $\gamma_{2}^{cAY+v}(\beta)=\gamma_{2}^{Y}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), $\kappa_{1}^{cAY+v}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=\gamma_{1}^{Y}(\beta)$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), and $\kappa_{2}^{cAY+v}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=\gamma_{2}^{Y}(\beta)$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ). Under Assumption 2.3 for $X=Y$, $\alpha^{cAY+v}(\beta)=\alpha^{Y}(\beta)$αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_A italic_Y + italic_v end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = italic_αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた )

Proof.

(a) Fact 2.2.1 of Chaudhuri, (1996) details the equivariance of geometric quantiles to translation and orthogonal transformations. The result follows immediately from

$$q^{Y}(-\beta\xi)-m^{Y}=q^{Y-m^{Y}}(-\beta\xi)=q^{-(Y-m^{Y})}(-\beta\xi)=-q^{-(Y-m^{Y})}(\beta\xi) =-q^{Y-m^{Y}}(\beta\xi)$$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) = italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) = - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) βべーた italic_ξくしー )

$$=-(q^{Y}(\beta\xi)-m^{Y}),$$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ,

where the five equalities follow from translation equivariance, non-skewedness, orthogonal equivariance, non-skewedness, and translation equivariance, respectively.

(b) For any $\xi,\xi^{\prime}\in S^{n-1}$ξくしー , italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, there exists some orthogonal $A$ for which $\xi^{\prime}=A\xi$ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_A italic_ξくしー. Then,

$$q^{Y}(\beta\xi^{\prime})-m^{Y}=q^{Y-m^{Y}}(\beta\xi^{\prime})=q^{A(Y-m^{Y})}(\beta\xi^{\prime})=Aq^{A(Y-m^{Y})}(\beta\xi) =Aq^{Y-m^{Y}}(\beta\xi)$$βべーた italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A ( italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_A italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_A ( italic_Y - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) βべーた italic_ξくしー )

$$=A(q^{Y}(\beta\xi)-m^{Y})$$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )

where the five equalities follow from translation equivariance, spherical symmetry, orthogonal equivariance, spherical symmetry, and translation equivariance, respectively. Thus, the orthogonality of $A$ implies that $\lVert q^{Y}(\beta\xi^{\prime})-m^{Y}\rVert=\lVert q^{Y}(\beta\xi)-m^{Y}\rVert$βべーた italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ = ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ for all $\xi,\xi^{\prime}\in S^{n-1}$ξくしー , italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, from which the result follows.

(c) Note that Assumption 2.1 holds for $X=cAY+v$. By the aforementioned equivariance of geometric quantiles with respect to translation and orthogonal transformations, in addition to equivariance with respect to scaling,

$$q^{cAY+v}(\beta\xi)=cq^{Y}(\beta A\xi)+v;$$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) = italic_c italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_A italic_ξくしー ) + italic_v ; (1)

see Facts 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, of Chaudhuri, (1996). This implies that Assumption 2.2 holds for $X=cAY+v$ whenever it does so for $X=Y$, and similarly for Assumption 2.3. Given $\xi\in S^{n-1}$ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, $\xi^{\prime}$ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is in $S^{n-1}$ if and only if $\xi^{\prime}=A\xi$ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_A italic_ξくしー for some orthogonal $A$. The results are then easily derived from this fact and (1). ∎

For each positive integer $k$, define a set ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k\subset S^{n-1}$Ξくしー𝑘superscript𝑆𝑛1\Xi_{k}\subset S^{n-1}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of cardinality $k$. Then, our measures can be approximated by

$$\begin{array}{c}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\underset{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}{\max }\parallel q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-q^X(-\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})\parallel ,{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\frac{1}{k}\sum _{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}\parallel q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-q^X(-\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})\parallel ,\\ {\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\frac{{\max }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}\parallel q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})+q^X(-\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-2m^X\parallel }{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)},\\ {\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\frac{(1/k){\sum }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}(q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-m^X)}{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)},\\ {\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\frac{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)}{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)},{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\frac{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)}{{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)},\\ {\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}}^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k):=\log \left(\frac{{\max }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}\parallel q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-m^X\parallel }{{\min }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}\parallel q^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-m^X\parallel }\right).\end{array}$$Ξくしー𝑘subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉formulae-sequenceassignsuperscriptsubscript^𝛿2𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘1𝑘subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘delimited-∥∥superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉formulae-sequenceassignsuperscriptsubscript^𝛾1𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉2superscript𝑚𝑋superscriptsubscript^𝛿1𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘formulae-sequenceassignsuperscriptsubscript^𝛾2𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘1𝑘subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑚𝑋superscriptsubscript^𝛿2𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘formulae-sequenceassignsuperscriptsubscript^𝜅1𝑋𝛽superscript𝛽′subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript^𝛿1𝑋superscript𝛽′subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript^𝛿1𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘formulae-sequenceassignsuperscriptsubscript^𝜅2𝑋𝛽superscript𝛽′subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript^𝛿2𝑋superscript𝛽′subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript^𝛿2𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘assignsuperscript^𝛼𝑋𝛽subscriptΞくしー𝑘subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑚𝑋subscript𝜉subscriptΞくしー𝑘superscript𝑞𝑋𝛽𝜉superscript𝑚𝑋\begin{gathered}\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k}):=\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}{% \lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-q^{X}(-\beta\xi)\rVert},~{}~{}\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(% \beta;\Xi_{k}):=\frac{1}{k}\sum_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}{\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-q^{X}(-% \beta\xi)\rVert},\\ \hat{\gamma}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k}):=\frac{\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}{\lVert q^{X}(% \beta\xi)+q^{X}(-\beta\xi)-2m^{X}\rVert}}{\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})}% ,\\ \hat{\gamma}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k}):=\frac{(1/k)\sum_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}{(q^{X}(% \beta\xi)-m^{X})}}{\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})},\\ \hat{\kappa}_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k}):=\frac{\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}% (\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})}{\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})},~{}~{}\hat{% \kappa}_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k}):=\frac{\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(% \beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})}{\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})},\\ \hat{\alpha}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k}):=\log\bigg{(}\frac{\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}\lVert q% ^{X}(\beta\xi)-m^{X}\rVert}{\min_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}\lVert q^{X}(\beta\xi)-m^{X}% \rVert}\bigg{)}.\end{gathered}start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ∥ , over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) ∥ , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) + italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - 2 italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG ( 1 / italic_k ) ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := divide start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_αあるふぁ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := roman_log ( divide start_ARG roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG start_ARG roman_min start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた italic_ξくしー ) - italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∥ end_ARG ) . end_CELL end_ROW (2)

For each $k$, define $\mu_{k}$μみゅー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to be the empirical measure corresponding to ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k$Ξくしー𝑘\Xi_{k}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; that is, the probability measure that assigned a mass of $1/k$ to each point in ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k$Ξくしー𝑘\Xi_{k}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Define $\mu$μみゅー to the uniform probability measure on $S^{n-1}$, or equivalently the normed volume measure of $S^{n-1}$; that is, for any measurable $F\subset S^{n-1}$, $\mu(F)$μみゅー ( italic_F ) is the $(n-1)$-dimensional volume of $F$ according to the standard volume measure on $S^{n-1}$ divided by $SA(n-1)$. The sequence of sets ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_1,{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_2,\mathrm{\dots }$Ξくしー1subscriptΞくしー2…\Xi_{1},\Xi_{2},\ldotsroman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … is called equidistributed if the corresponding sequence of empirical measures $\mu_{1},\mu_{2},\ldots$μみゅー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_μみゅー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … converge weakly to $\mu$μみゅー.

Proposition 2.2.

Let ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_1,{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_2,\mathrm{\dots }\subset S^{n-1}$Ξくしー1subscriptΞくしー2…superscript𝑆𝑛1\Xi_{1},\Xi_{2},\ldots\subset S^{n-1}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ⊂ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be an equidistant sequence, $\beta\in(0,1)$βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ), and Assumption 2.1 hold for $X=Y$. Then, ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝛿1𝑌𝛽\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\delta}_{1}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})=\delta_{1}^{Y}(\beta)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝛿2𝑌𝛽\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\delta}_{2}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})=\delta_{2}^{Y}(\beta)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ). Under Assumption 2.2 for $X=Y$, ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝛾1𝑌𝛽\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\gamma}_{1}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})=\gamma_{1}^{Y}(\beta)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝛾2𝑌𝛽\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\gamma}_{2}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})=\gamma_{2}^{Y}(\beta)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ), ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜅1𝑌𝛽superscript𝛽′\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\kappa}_{1}^{Y}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})=% \kappa_{1}^{Y}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), and ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}_2^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝜅2𝑌𝛽superscript𝛽′\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\kappa}_{2}^{Y}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})=% \kappa_{2}^{Y}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ). Under Assumption 2.3 for $X=Y$, ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}}^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘superscript𝛼𝑌𝛽\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\alpha}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})=\alpha^{Y}(\beta)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_αあるふぁ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ).

Proof.

For a continuous function $f:S^{n-1}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$, there exists some $\xi^{\prime}$ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the compact set $S^{n-1}$ for which $\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}f(\xi)=f(\xi^{\prime})$ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) = italic_f ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ). By continuity, for any $\epsilon>0$, there is some open $\eta>0$ηいーた > 0 for which $v\in B_{\eta}^{n}(\xi^{\prime})\cap S^{n-1}$ηいーた end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ∩ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT implies $f(v)>f(\xi^{\prime})-\epsilon$ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) - italic_ϵ. Then, by the Portmanteau theorem, $|{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k\cap B_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\eta </rb><rt>いーた</rt></ruby>}}^n({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })|={\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\mu </rb><rt>みゅー</rt></ruby>}}_n(B_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\eta </rb><rt>いーた</rt></ruby>}}^n({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })\cap S^{n-1})\to \mathrm{<ruby><rb>\mu </rb><rt>みゅー</rt></ruby>}(B_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\eta </rb><rt>いーた</rt></ruby>}}^n({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })\cap S^{n-1})>0$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝐵𝜂𝑛superscript𝜉′subscript𝜇𝑛superscriptsubscript𝐵𝜂𝑛superscript𝜉′superscript𝑆𝑛1→𝜇superscriptsubscript𝐵𝜂𝑛superscript𝜉′superscript𝑆𝑛10\lvert\Xi_{k}\cap B_{\eta}^{n}(\xi^{\prime})\rvert=\mu_{n}(B_{\eta}^{n}(\xi^{% \prime})\cap S^{n-1})\rightarrow\mu(B_{\eta}^{n}(\xi^{\prime})\cap S^{n-1})>0| roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∩ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ηいーた end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) | = italic_μみゅー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ηいーた end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ∩ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) → italic_μみゅー ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ηいーた end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ∩ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) > 0 as $k\rightarrow\infty$, implying that ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k\cap B_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\eta </rb><rt>いーた</rt></ruby>}}^n({\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime })$Ξくしー𝑘superscriptsubscript𝐵𝜂𝑛superscript𝜉′\Xi_{k}\cap B_{\eta}^{n}(\xi^{\prime})roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∩ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ηいーた end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) is non-empty for sufficiently large $k$. Therefore, for sufficiently large $k$, ${\max }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})>{sup}_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in S^{n-1}}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})-ϵ$Ξくしー𝑘𝑓𝜉subscriptsupremum𝜉superscript𝑆𝑛1𝑓𝜉italic-ϵ\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}f(\xi)>\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}f(\xi)-\epsilonroman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) > roman_sup start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) - italic_ϵ while ${\max }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})\le {sup}_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in S^{n-1}}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘𝑓𝜉subscriptsupremum𝜉superscript𝑆𝑛1𝑓𝜉\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}f(\xi)\leq\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}f(\xi)roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) ≤ roman_sup start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) since ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k\subset S^{n-1}$Ξくしー𝑘superscript𝑆𝑛1\Xi_{k}\subset S^{n-1}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. This can be done for any $\epsilon$, so ${lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty }}{\max }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})={sup}_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in S^{n-1}}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})$Ξくしー𝑘𝑓𝜉subscriptsupremum𝜉superscript𝑆𝑛1𝑓𝜉\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\max_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}f(\xi)=\sup_{\xi\in S^{n-1}}f(\xi)roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_max start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) = roman_sup start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ). The analogous result replacing $\sup$ with $\inf$ and $\max$ with $\min$ can be shown similarly, and because $q^{Y}$ is continuous, ${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\delta}_{1}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), ${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\gamma}_{1}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), ${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\kappa}_{1}^{Y}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), and ${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^Y(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\alpha}_{1}^{Y}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_αあるふぁ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) converge to the appropriate terms as $k\rightarrow\infty$.

The aforementioned continuous $f$ is also bounded because its domain $S^{n-1}$ is compact, and so the Portmanteau theorem also implies that ${\sum }_{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}\in {\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})=\int f𝑑{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\mu </rb><rt>みゅー</rt></ruby>}}_k\to \int f𝑑\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\mu </rb><rt>みゅー</rt></ruby>}={\int }_{S^{n-1}}f(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>})𝑑\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}$Ξくしー𝑘𝑓𝜉𝑓differential-dsubscript𝜇𝑘→𝑓differential-d𝜇subscriptsuperscript𝑆𝑛1𝑓𝜉differential-d𝜉\sum_{\xi\in\Xi_{k}}f(\xi)=\int fd\mu_{k}\rightarrow\int fd\mu=\int_{S^{n-1}}f% (\xi)d\xi∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ξくしー ∈ roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) = ∫ italic_f italic_d italic_μみゅー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → ∫ italic_f italic_d italic_μみゅー = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f ( italic_ξくしー ) italic_d italic_ξくしー. Then, the rest of the statement immediately follows from the continuity of $q^{Y}$ and each of its $n$ component functions. ∎

Remark 2.1.

When $n=2$, letting ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k=\{(\cos (2\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\pi </rb><rt>ぱい</rt></ruby>}l/k),\sin (2\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\pi </rb><rt>ぱい</rt></ruby>}l/k)):l=1,\mathrm{\dots },k\}$Ξくしー𝑘conditional-set2𝜋𝑙𝑘2𝜋𝑙𝑘𝑙1…𝑘\Xi_{k}=\{(\cos(2\pi l/k),\sin(2\pi l/k)):l=1,\ldots,k\}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { ( roman_cos ( 2 italic_πぱい italic_l / italic_k ) , roman_sin ( 2 italic_πぱい italic_l / italic_k ) ) : italic_l = 1 , … , italic_k } clearly results in an equidistributed sequence. The situation is more complicated when $n\geq 3$. However, by letting ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k=\{{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_1,\mathrm{\dots },{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k\}$Ξくしー𝑘subscript𝜉1…subscript𝜉𝑘\Xi_{k}=\{\xi_{1},\ldots,\xi_{k}\}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT }, where $\xi_{1},\xi_{2},\ldots$ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … are independent and identically distributed random elements drawn from the uniform distribution on $S^{n-1}$ for each positive integer $k$, we can guarantee that ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_1,{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_2,\mathrm{\dots }$Ξくしー1subscriptΞくしー2…\Xi_{1},\Xi_{2},\ldotsroman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … is almost surely equidistributed (and therefore that the convergences in Proposition 2.2 happen almost surely) because $S^{n-1}$ is separable; see for example Problem 3.1 on page 38 of Billingsley, (1999). One can easily draw an element from the uniform distribution on $S^{n-1}$ by generating a vector from an $n$-variate normal distribution with non-zero, isotropic variance and dividing the vector by its norm.

3 Numerical experiments

The code for the experiments in this section, implemented in Python with PyTorch, can be found at https://github.com/hayoungshin1/Quantile-based-measures.

3.1 Illustration of these measures

In this section, we want to explore the performance of each of the seven measures. To do so, we generated 16 datasets, four for each of the four properties (variance, skewness, kurtosis, and spherical asymmetry) in the Euclidean plane. For a given property, each dataset has an associated level $\nu\in\{0,1,2,3\}$νにゅー ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 }, and the datasets are generated in such a way that a plausible measure of that property should decrease as $\nu$νにゅー increases. Next, we will describe precisely how the data were generated.

Figure 1: The four columns display, in order, the dispersion, skewness, kurtosis, and spherical asymmetry data sets visualized; plots in the same column are to the same scale. The $i$th row, for $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ displays the data sets for $\nu=i-1$νにゅー = italic_i - 1.

First, we generated $N=300$ vectors $v_{1},\ldots,v_{N}$ from a bivariate normal distribution $\mathcal{N}(0,I/4)$, and for each of the 16 datasets, we created a new vector $w_{j}$ from $v_{j}=(v_{j}^{1},v_{j}^{2})^{T}$. To be specific, for the dispersion datasets,

$$w_{j}=\begin{pmatrix}v_{j}^{1}\\ 4(2^{-\nu})v_{j}^{2}\end{pmatrix},$$νにゅー end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) ,

for the skewness datasets,

$$w_{j}=(1-\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}(v_{j}^{1})^{2}\\ (v_{j}^{2})^{2}/2\end{pmatrix}+(\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}v_{j}^{1}\\ v_{j}^{2}/2\end{pmatrix},$$νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 2 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) + ( italic_νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 2 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) ,

for the kurtosis datasets,

$$w_{j}=(1-\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}(v_{j}^{1})^{3}\\ (v_{j}^{2})^{3}/2\end{pmatrix}+(\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}v_{j}^{1}\\ v_{j}^{2}/2\end{pmatrix},$$νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 2 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) + ( italic_νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 2 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) ,

and for the spherical asymmetry datasets,

$$w_{j}=(1-\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}(v_{j}^{1})^{3}\\ (v_{j}^{2})^{3}\end{pmatrix}+(\nu/3)\begin{pmatrix}v_{j}^{1}\\ v_{j}^{2}\end{pmatrix}.$$νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) + ( italic_νにゅー / 3 ) ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) .

Defining $\hat{w}$ to be the Euclidean geometric median of $w_{1},\ldots,w_{N}$, the set of vectors was centered by letting $w_{j}^{*}=w_{j}-\hat{w}$ for each $j$. Doing so ensures that the Euclidean geometric median of the $w_{j}^{*}$’s is 0. This makes it easier to directly compare isoquantile contours defined by $\{q^{X}(\beta\xi):\xi\in S^{n-1}\}$βべーた italic_ξくしー ) : italic_ξくしー ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } for some $\beta\in(0,1)$βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) for different datasets. The 16 datasets are shown in Figure 1. For a given dataset, the $X$ whose distributional characteristics we are measuring follows an empirical distribution, placing a mass of $1/N$ at each $w_{j}^{*}$, $j=1,\ldots,N$.

Because of the concerns about geometric quantiles for non-isotropic distribution, for the dispersion datasets, we decided to decrease dispersion in only the second coordinate of $w_{j}$ to show that $\delta_{1}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) and $\delta_{2}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) work well even when the data do not have isotropic covariance. We divided the second coordinate of $w_{j}$ by 2 for the skewness and kurtosis datasets for the same reason. In contrast, for the spherical asymmetry datasets, we have not done so to show that $\alpha^{X}(\beta)$αあるふぁ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) can detect changes in spherical asymmetry even when the covariance remains roughly isotropic.

The dispersion datasets become less dispersed as $\nu$νにゅー increases. The rationale for generating the skewness and kurtosis datasets is that the element-wise square of a non-skewed centered real dataset is positively skewed, and the element-wise cube of a centered real dataset has fatter tails than the original dataset. Finally, cubing each coordinate for a spherically symmetric dataset gives a dataset that is no longer spherically symmetric but still has isotropic covariance.

Table 1 lists the univariate quantile-based measures of dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis defined in the introduction for each coordinate of $w_{j}^{*}$ from the appropriate datasets. It shows this decrease in the properties more precisely. These depend on the coordinate system and are imperfect as measures for multivariate data. Still, they do give a rough sense of the dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis of their respective data sets. For the kurtosis measures $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.8)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.8 ), and otherwise $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5. We approximated our seven measures using (2) with ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k$Ξくしー𝑘\Xi_{k}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for $k=24$ as described in Remark 2.1. Table 2 lists the results for these measures according to $\nu$νにゅー. We used $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.8)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.8 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 for the others. Each of the measures decreases as $\nu$νにゅー increases, and moreover, the sizes of the drops generally comport with what we would expect from Table 1.

Table 1: Coordinate-wise univariate quantile-based measures of dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis for the $w_{j}^{*}$ from the dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis datasets, respectively, where $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.8)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.8 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 otherwise

$\nu$νにゅー	$\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた )	$\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた )	$\kappa_{0}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
0	0.6719, 2.6402	0.3357, 0.4266	44.4432, 112.7463
1	0.6719, 1.3201	0.2358, 0.4034	6.5622, 8.4033
2	0.6719, 0.6601	0.2510, 0.1990	4.6026, 5.7469
3	0.6719, 0.3300	0.0915, 0.0320	3.9035, 4.8311

Table 2: Estimates for the seven measures for $\nu\in\{0,1,2,3\}$νにゅー ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 } where $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.9)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.9 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 otherwise.

$\nu$νにゅー	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\gamma}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\gamma}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\kappa}_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\kappa}_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}}^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\alpha}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_αあるふぁ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
0	2.7163	2.1863	0.2973	0.0555	24.7410	26.2747	0.3234
1	1.4354	1.2754	0.2779	0.0501	7.1674	7.9259	0.1421
2	0.8747	0.8524	0.1599	0.0168	5.3794	5.9430	0.1092
3	0.7567	0.6622	0.0669	0.0015	4.6571	5.1550	0.1025

To alleviate concerns about extreme geometric quantiles, we also performed the same experiments when $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.98)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.98 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.98$βべーた = 0.98 otherwise. The results are shown in Table 4, and Table 3 is analogous to Table 1. The concerns about (extreme) geometric quantiles do not have any bearing on how our measures perform. For example, suppose a dataset is transformed to maintain its median but becomes less dispersed. In that case, it is sufficient, though not necessary, for the contours are pulled inward toward the median, and the specific shapes of the isoquantile contours do not matter. This is observed for our dispersion data sets: see the first column of Figure 2, which shows how the isoquantile contours change with $\nu$νにゅー. The second column of Figure 2 clearly shows reductions in skewness as $\nu$νにゅー increases. The other two columns are more challenging to decipher visually because some contours are too dense, but they are included for completeness.

Table 3: Coordinate-wise univariate quantile-based measures of dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis for the $w_{j}^{*}$ from the dispersion, skewness, and kurtosis datasets, respectively, where $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.98)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.98 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.98$βべーた = 0.98 otherwise

$\nu$νにゅー	$\delta_{0}^{X}(\beta)$δでるた start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた )	$\gamma_{0}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた )	$\kappa_{0}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime})$κかっぱ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )
0	2.3028, 9.2975	0.8502, 0.8561	269.4612, 702.7808
1	2.3028, 4.6488	0.7933, 0.8541	24.3179, 31.8565
2	2.3028, 2.3244	0.5423, 0.5602	11.6365, 14.7756
3	2.3028, 1.1622	-0.0414, -0.0276	7.1126, 8.8870

Table 4: Estimates for the seven measures for $\nu\in\{0,1,2,3\}$νにゅー ∈ { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 } where $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.98)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.98 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.98$βべーた = 0.98 otherwise.

$\nu$νにゅー	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\delta}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\delta </rb><rt>でるた</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\delta}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_δでるた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\gamma}_{1}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\gamma}_{2}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_1^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\kappa}_{1}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\kappa </rb><rt>かっぱ</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}}^{\prime };{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\kappa}_{2}^{X}(\beta,\beta^{\prime};\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_κかっぱ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )	${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\alpha </rb><rt>あるふぁ</rt></ruby>}}}^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>};{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_k)$Ξくしー𝑘\hat{\alpha}^{X}(\beta;\Xi_{k})over^ start_ARG italic_αあるふぁ end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ; roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
0	18.5634	14.4095	0.4242	0.0711	152.8021	162.3169	0.3463
1	9.3980	7.8012	0.3387	0.0513	31.0124	35.2529	0.2456
2	5.1021	5.0053	0.1856	0.0165	19.9837	21.1333	0.1376
3	4.8817	4.0176	0.0298	0.0002	15.7785	15.4955	0.0640

Figure 2: The four columns display isoquantiles contours for, in order, the dispersion, skewness, kurtosis, and spherical asymmetry data sets; plots are not to the same scale. In the first row, $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.8)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.8 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 otherwise; in the second row, $(\beta,\beta^{\prime})=(0.2,0.98)$βべーた , italic_βべーた start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 0.2 , 0.98 ) for the kurtosis measures and $\beta=0.98$βべーた = 0.98 otherwise. The orange, green, red, and purple contours are the contours for the $\nu=0,1,2,3$νにゅー = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 data sets, respectively, while the blue point in the center of the disk is their common median.

3.2 Confidence regions

We now use bootstrapping to compute confidence regions and, hence, do testing. Recall that for a parameter $\theta$θしーた, an estimate $\hat{\theta}$θしーた end_ARG, and bootstrap estimates $\hat{\theta}_{1}^{*},\ldots,\hat{\theta}_{T}^{*}$θしーた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , … , over^ start_ARG italic_θしーた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, a possible $100(1-\tau)$τたう )% bootstrap confidence region is $\{\hat{\theta}-w:w\in W\}$θしーた end_ARG - italic_w : italic_w ∈ italic_W }, where $W$ is some region containing about $100(1-\tau)$τたう )% of the values of $\hat{\theta}_{t}^{*}-\hat{\theta}$θしーた end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - over^ start_ARG italic_θしーた end_ARG, $t=1,\ldots,T$. Here, we let $W=B_{r}^{n}(0)$ with $r$ chosen for appropriate coverage.

Setting $T=1000$ and $\alpha=0.05$αあるふぁ = 0.05, for $X$ following the standard bivariate normal distribution, we calculated a confidence region for $\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta)$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) (precisely, ${\widehat{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>},{\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_{24})$Ξくしー24\hat{\gamma}_{2}^{X}(\beta,\Xi_{24})over^ start_ARG italic_γがんま end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた , roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 24 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for the same ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\Xi </rb><rt>くしー</rt></ruby>}}_{24}$Ξくしー24\Xi_{24}roman_Ξくしー start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 24 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as in the previous section) based on $N=300$ draws from this distribution. For this $X$, $\gamma_{2}^{X}(\beta)=0$γがんま start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_βべーた ) = 0 for all $\beta\in(0,1)$βべーた ∈ ( 0 , 1 ) thanks to Proposition 1(a), so we checked whether 0 was contained in the confidence region. To estimate confidence region coverage, this process was repeated 1000 times for $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 and 0.98. Our confidence regions had excellent coverage, with 96% and 94.8% of confidence regions containing 0 when $\beta=0.5$βべーた = 0.5 and 0.98, respectively.

Because ${\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\gamma </rb><rt>がんま</rt></ruby>}}_2^X(\mathrm{<ruby><rb>\beta </rb><rt>べーた</rt></ruby>}$