Suppose you have:
- $n$ data points, i.i.d. $X_i \forall i \in 1,2,3,...n$
- $H_0: X_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0,1)$
- $H_1: X_i \sim \mathcal{N}(0,4)$
You know the distribution of $X_i$ under both $H_o$ and $H_1$
The problem is to choose $H_0$ or $H_1$ that results in a given False Positive Rate (Type 1 error) under $H_0$
The likelihood ratio test as described here goes as follows:
- Define the likelihood ratio $R = \frac{\mathcal{L}(H_1 \mid X)}{\mathcal{L}(H_0 \mid X)}$ = $\frac{P(X;H_1)}{P(X; H_0)}$
- Set $R$ equal to some threshold $\xi$
- Decide a level of Type 1 error $\alpha$ under $H_0$ that you want
- Find the threshold $\xi$ such that $P(R > \xi ; H_0) = \alpha$
- Reject $H_0$ if $R > \xi$
This seems like a lot of that that didn't need to be. We could directly have set $P(X;H_0) = \alpha$ to be the decision boundary. That is to say if $P(X;H_0)$ is lesser than $\alpha$ then reject the null hypothesis. Why the extra steps of coming via $\xi$? What purpose does the likelihood ratio test serve?