<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Applied Mathematics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2152-7385</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/am.2014.511161</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AM-47062</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>COMPUTER SCIENCE &amp; COMMUNICATIONS</subject><subject>ENGINEERING</subject><subject>PHYSICS &amp; MATHEMATICS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Some Improvement on Convergence Rates of Kernel Density Estimator</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Xiaoran</surname><given-names>Xie</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jingjing</surname><given-names>Wu</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>xiaxie@ucalgary.ca(XX)</email>;<email>jinwu@ucalgary.ca(JW)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>20</day><month>06</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>11</issue><fpage>1684</fpage><lpage>1696</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>5</day>	<month>March</month>	<year>2014</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>10</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2014</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>18</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2014</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
	In this paper two
kernel density estimators are introduced and investigated. In order to reduce
bias, we intuitively subtract an estimated bias term from ordinary kernel
density estimator. The second proposed density estimator is a geometric
extrapolation of the first bias reduced estimator. Theoretical properties such
as bias, variance and mean squared error are investigated for both estimators.
To observe their finite sample performance, a Monte Carlo simulation study
based on small to moderately large samples is presented.
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Kernel Density Estimation</kwd><kwd> Geometric Extrapolation</kwd><kwd> Bias Reduction</kwd><kwd> Mean Squared Error</kwd><kwd> Convergence Rate</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Many efforts have been devoted to investigating the optimal performance of kernel density estimator since it has been the most widely used nonparametric method in the last decades. Suppose we use <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\bfd4b32b-37ce-4b7c-b697-534f4f781388.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> to denote the kernel estimator of the true density function<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\acae663e-4ad5-4219-940f-845465ac2dfb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Normally we use mean squared error (MSE) and its two components, namely bias and variance, to quantify the accuracy of an estimator. Note that the MSE of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\c4e9aebc-d56f-4313-b707-a5a1486a59e2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is decomposed into two parts:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1012"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\2bc129d7-0520-49b3-8278-5dfa6c9687e0.png"/></disp-formula><p>There have been numerous literatures that discuss approaches to improving the performance of kernel estimators, while reducing the bias has been the most commonly considered one. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref1">1</xref>] obtained the best</p><p>asymptotic convergence rate <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b7dc250f-7db6-4ec8-aa75-df323ce40229.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of MSE for orthogonal kernel estimators. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref2">2</xref>] introduced geo-</p><p>metric extrapolation of nonnegative kernels, while [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref3">3</xref>] discussed the number of vanishing moments of kernel order using Fourier transformation. Variable kernel estimation in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref4">4</xref>] successfully reduced the bias by employing larger smoothing parameters in low density regions, while [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref5">5</xref>] introduced the idea of inadmissible kernels which also results in reduced bias. On the other hand, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref6">6</xref>] proposed an estimator using some probabilistic arguments which achieves the goal of bias reduction. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref7">7</xref>] suggested a locally parametric density estimator, a semiparametric technique, which effectively reduces the order of bias. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref8">8</xref>] proposed algorithms relevant to quadratic polynomial and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\98ce8bac-8e9f-4f05-98a5-17b5d141f010.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> cumulative distribution function (c.d.f.) which accommodates possible poles at boundaries and in consequence reduces the bias at boundaries. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref9">9</xref>] introduced a bias reduction method using estimated c.d.f. via smoothed kernel transformations. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref10">10</xref>] introduced a two-stage multiplicative bias corrected estimator. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref11">11</xref>] developed a skewing method to reduce the bias while the variance is only increased by a moderate constant factor. In addition, some recent works discussed approaches of obtaining smaller bias of the estimator via several other methods. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref12">12</xref>] worked out a bias reduced kernel relative to the classical kernel estimator via Lipschitz condition. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref13">13</xref>] introduced an adjusted kernel density estimator in which the kernel is adapted to the data but not fixed. This method naturally leads to an adaptive-choice of the smoothing parameters which can reduce the bias.</p><p>Although the variance reduction method is not as approachable as the bias reduction method, there still have been a lot of scholars working on it. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref14">14</xref>] suggested an approach to reduce the variance in local linear regression employing the idea of the skewing method. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref15">15</xref>] also used the skewing method on bias reduction and variance reduction at the same time which in turn reduces the MSE.</p><p>Many of above mentioned bias reduction methods result in complex kernel density estimators. In this paper, we introduce a novel but intuitive and feasible bias reduced kernel density estimator. In Section 2, we present the bias reduced estimator and investigate its asymptotic bias, variance and MSE. A second estimator is proposed and studied in Section 3 as a geometric extrapolation of the bias reduced kernel. To examine the finite sample performance of both estimators, a simulation study is carried out in Section 4. Finally some remarks are given in Section 5.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. A Bias Reduced Kernel Estimator</title><p>Kernel density estimator was first introduced in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref16">16</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref17">17</xref>] . Suppose <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\93d55708-5b19-448f-9f25-ccb8fb6fc461.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is a simple random sample from the unknown density function f. Let K be a function on real line, i.e. the “kernel”, and let h be a positive value, i.e. the “bandwidth”. Then the kernel density estimator of f is defined as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1013"><label>(2.1)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\988677a3-50a4-4e13-8e76-8e7ec6f27992.png"/></disp-formula><p>To make the estimator meaningful, the kernel function is usually required to satisfy conditions<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3d7d9860-23ab-4525-93f5-489566c7d23e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\004a501f-b6e6-4998-be4d-d0b38a2203d7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8e115e5d-9c8f-4db6-bab2-6d049e54073f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Both [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref18">18</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref19">19</xref>] pointed out that if <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a5ef6d40-1590-42db-9c9d-811b115b8a25.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and f is twice continuously differentiable in a neighborhood of x, then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1014"><label>(2.2)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\0d06d108-aa31-4734-90ac-d4ac6a1e8f93.png"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1015"><label>(2.3)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\901d40fc-2411-481e-9ee2-a495316d8764.png"/></disp-formula><p>Then from (2.2) and (2.3) we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1016"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ffb66baf-77fd-46e8-ba2e-22301a8cb298.png"/></disp-formula><p>We can easily see that the optimized bandwidth is <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\9a124c06-77ef-41fc-b7f0-419f0bb6dfab.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and then the optimal MSE is of the order<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\24971e25-5a9c-4b15-abac-d56fdcf3be3f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>In order to reduce the bias of ordinary kernel density estimator, we can intuitively subtract the leading bias</p><p>term <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6d4eabfa-c947-469c-99fc-db2ce698ed5e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in (2.2) from it. Since the leading term of the bias is unavailable due to the unknown f, we can simply use its estimation, i.e.</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1017"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\4a1fa674-743a-402d-b483-4295693c85c6.png"/></disp-formula><p>One could use any type of estimation of the bias term. We could simply replace f with the kernel estimator f<sub>n</sub> since it is readily available. As a result, our proposed estimator is</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1018"><label>(2.4)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e40e5c36-8843-4709-b89b-74bc6152da41.png"/></disp-formula><p>From the way of construction, this new estimator should be able to reduce the bias and thus the MSE. To see whether this is the case or not, we next calculate the bias and the variance of<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\562e5ade-e108-40e8-acdf-86216c6ac4e5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. We make the following regularity condition on f, K and h:</p><p>1)<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\4494ff7c-a066-4e58-88c6-8378ea061e94.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>2) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a1419ace-1c05-4918-ad6c-c438f41e5f46.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>is fourth differentiable in a neighbourhood of x.</p><p>3) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\5e8354de-076a-4b30-b7d0-16b78ae36c01.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ece8529a-2abb-4547-b875-a6746673284e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\c1764380-1464-4052-acc0-85ea8355385c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>Theorem 2.1. Under 1), 2) and 3),</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1019"><label>(2.5)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a9cad5d9-127c-4860-993e-6ab7cbff283a.png"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1020"><label>(2.6)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6e45312d-96f5-4981-b87b-aafa50501a6f.png"/></disp-formula><p>Consequently,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1021"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ca49944b-0c53-4024-b9df-c1a81db022c6.png"/></disp-formula><p>and the optimal MSE is of the order <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\26050cee-0f67-481f-ab10-7ca886d0a03d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8023fa45-432b-4ed4-9035-b56864ca758b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>Proof. By Taylor expansion we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1022"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\cafaf71c-d21d-4075-ab7f-091c648b5556.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1023"><label>(2.7)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\d156146d-1213-4f87-9fa4-44a454c1e4ca.png"/></disp-formula><p>Thus we have</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1024"><label>(2.8)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\bb943a12-a38a-47c9-b39c-e4dd5055df4c.png"/></disp-formula><p>On the other hand,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1025"><label>(2.9)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\4998fac8-cb18-46a0-9f30-6cfc619c9bd5.png"/></disp-formula><p>Note that (2.7) gives</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1026"><label>(2.10)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\36e6fdba-6109-401a-9dc9-851b42639f56.png"/></disp-formula><p>Finally (2.9) and (2.10) together with (2.3) gives (2.6). ,</p><p>Remark 2.1. From Theorem 2.1 we can see that if K is symmetric, i.e.<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\cfc33123-3a19-4965-b8aa-96d088f89d38.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, then all the odd moments of K are zero and, as a result, the bias of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3325ce93-4033-4b16-9839-69892f4c37e9.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> will be improved to a higher order of<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\392e9336-2a6d-445c-8e7e-6d7bda690479.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. In this</p><p>case, the optimal MSE is further reduced to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3fadc92c-b79c-4889-9494-8aa1343c0fc8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\eb99736c-f72f-4059-b44d-24dbef8361a8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>Remark 2.2. From the definition of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\d33b4c82-e003-4a3a-b6e4-acba37adc9b1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in (2.4), this estimator could be possibly negative on some points x. In order to make it meaningful in practice, i.e. make it a positive density estimator, one can use the following variation of the proposed bias deducted estimator</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1027"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b4b51ad7-0ade-41f9-8985-03b24b532f3f.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\f0c40a10-20c6-45ab-84d9-5499dfef2456.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is an indicator function that takes value one on set A and zero otherwise. Note that the first term on the right hand side of Equation (2.4) converges to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b5976b6c-359d-4c8c-b35e-d85f737ec0b6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in probability, while the second term is of the order</p><p><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\bc57ba24-4c56-4229-9f29-d2fb66000dfc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, which goes to zero as <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\60819812-84cb-4a90-8cde-cd750b838fa4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> under 3). Thus <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\d4560def-3d72-4ff6-9200-70e39a3fc348.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> converges to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ac14b076-be24-48d0-b9ee-d38e5562b236.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> in probability, and as a re-</p><p>sult <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\f3ee686f-4dd5-4cce-af88-3aa583babf3f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is positive in probabililty at any point <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\74087062-8d7e-4aa7-9fd2-ddb0c0521bc7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a38d9c7f-f3ee-43a0-ba6f-efb68a4c16c8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> the support of f. Therefore, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\cca7c7a5-ed48-44d7-8a4c-f188f0956cfc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>has similar performance and properties as<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\83a41760-43ad-43d3-aa17-dae0e9a61579.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, especially when sample size is large.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. A Geometric Extrapolated Kernel Estimator with Bias Reduction</title><p>Geometric extrapolation was introduced in kernel density estimation by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref2">2</xref>] . Consider the ordinary kernel density estimator with two different bandwidths h and 2h:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1028"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8357709b-e078-4995-a44f-71ec47dc5ddd.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1029"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8357709b-e078-4995-a44f-71ec47dc5ddd.png"/></disp-formula><p>Suppose the kernel function K above is symmetric so that all the odd moments of K are zero. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref2">2</xref>] proposed the following estimator</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1030"><label>(3.1)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\13d5f67b-adb3-4cba-9956-9cb30672cbd0.png"/></disp-formula><p>Note that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\d427d3fa-7694-4c51-afb5-1f31a0c19247.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> doesn’t have integral one. In order to improve the MSE of order <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e7cb3500-be7e-41c3-8c7c-fbcf842c19fc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of the ordinary kernel estimator, one has to relax the constraint of integrating to one. The powers <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3fad55a9-f9cf-4a1d-a39b-12a10f15599a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\5a308bcb-a58d-4239-ba43-9514c03a4ac5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> are selected to reduce the bias of the ordinary kernel estimator to<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\1c342c0a-2515-4f7b-b209-94bfa61f8b4d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Consequently, the MSE of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ec784027-e21a-4a87-a98c-4019f06427b2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is improved to the order of<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\30cab6d9-466c-4b42-8ce6-a09a30bd468b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, which is a faster convergence rate than the rate <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\1ef16ca8-0289-4cf7-81f9-f17f5e1fd22d.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of the ordinary kernel estimator.</p><p>Instead of using the ordinary kernel estimator, we propose to use the bias reduced kernel estimator, presented in Section 2, in the construction of geometric extrapolated kernel (3.1). Denote the bias reduced kernel estimator with two bandwidths h and 2h as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1031"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\dbb79e5e-1f7e-4884-8840-13f9f59b445a.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1032"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\dbb79e5e-1f7e-4884-8840-13f9f59b445a.png"/></disp-formula><p>Now the geometric extrapolated kernel estimator with bias reduction is proposed as</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1033"><label>(3.2)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\cf27874f-b44a-4b74-918b-756de0e2f8a2.png"/></disp-formula><p>Since the bias reduced kernel estimator has improved bias and MSE over the ordinary kernel estimator, especially when K is symmetric, we expect that with geometric extrapolation it will achieve further improvement.</p><p>Theorem 3.1. Under 1), 2) and 3),</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1034"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b3aa06c7-b09b-429e-aa6d-5b362ed00261.png"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1035"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e2096f15-6c96-4b43-896b-4500ac76ac42.png"/></disp-formula><p>Consequently,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1036"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e3c9a31b-4d55-4f2d-ab04-08cf2c136722.png"/></disp-formula><p>and the optimal MSE is of the order <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6ee7b483-116d-460a-a1a0-6592a8a566be.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\16a71ce2-5d57-4ee7-8e5d-a41c6c6b31bd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p><p>Proof. We calculate <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\5fde8193-c334-4dac-a991-47cb02c8167b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> first. Similar argument to (2.8) gives</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1037"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3416a87a-ede3-4386-b43b-cd557e7f5f60.png"/></disp-formula><p>Let<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6bb1abf7-81d8-4beb-871e-ed313f25489b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1038"><label>(3.3)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\37699141-d22c-4823-9c68-d3fb34ce9d92.png"/></disp-formula><p>where</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1039"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\51acea63-821c-433f-8e55-1df59eb09917.png"/></disp-formula><p>Taking logarithm of (3.3) gives</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1040"><label>(3.4)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\92d2ba24-8102-4d22-8b21-61f34b123a62.png"/></disp-formula><p>Here we want to construct a geometric extrapolated kernel estimator of the form <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\bb6445d2-6bf4-4549-a444-2fbe64af0168.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> that possibly reduces the bias. In another word, we need <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\d6687e83-39f7-41e7-a53a-eae2b4c250a7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> has term <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\9c37dd7c-a582-4672-91c0-6ade025b88c5.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> but has <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\016c7b82-3b72-4a0a-b73a-b475389646f9.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> term disappear. Thus <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b7abe530-af37-4837-8404-d3750f8acfec.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8429f049-b137-4098-9ae5-1d11a629f95f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> have to satisfy</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1041"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\fcc08335-3d6b-4426-afaf-f9212781c4e2.png"/></disp-formula><p>The solution to above equation system is <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\97e73eea-6552-4919-82ba-2647352aa38e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a3bf7066-ef8d-40b6-aa70-1437f6a5665b.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and this gives our proposed estimator (3.2). Now</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1042"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\0917b3a8-d650-44d7-841e-5d68e4817674.png"/></disp-formula><p>and a series expansion for exponential function gives</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1043"><label>(3.5)</label><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e053ad1b-198a-46ad-8082-3a0e18838606.png"/></disp-formula><p>We rewrite</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1044"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\397e0e05-03a0-4965-ae11-dd7f144e152c.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1045"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\397e0e05-03a0-4965-ae11-dd7f144e152c.png"/></disp-formula><p>where U and V are both of order<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\4513f5b9-2eff-443b-a8df-80543ac9cbbb.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, and have expectations zero and variances and covariances of order<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\02721603-568a-4e10-b3fe-288799251f36.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. As a result,</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1046"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6de74800-dfe1-468f-9573-40c259bc213b.png"/></disp-formula><p>and then</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1047"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\19bfa831-6ea9-4aec-93ea-8fc6c84f3b1c.png"/></disp-formula><p>Since <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\8ee52b4c-3075-4996-9dd2-df5adce7e063.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> by (3.4), the variance of <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\7cf77fe7-cca6-4470-9c92-5049e3963c18.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1048"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\9efcf584-5888-424f-8d25-864f3fca3532.png"/></disp-formula><p>,</p><p>Remark 3.1. Article [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref2">2</xref>] proposed the geometric extrapolation of ordinary kernel estimator which results in</p><p>optimal MSE of the order<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\39cf91a7-28f5-4355-8efc-4399fbd394c7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Though here we achieve the same order of optimal MSE, we don’t impose the assumption that K is symmetric while [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.47062-ref2">2</xref>] does.</p><p>Remark 3.2. When K is symmetric, we propose another estimator</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1049"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\951897e2-375d-461d-9579-5c7ce2b1b4f5.png"/></disp-formula><p>This estimator reduces the bias to <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b16103c4-7697-458e-a41a-ab403bb4b2a4.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> and has improved optimal MSE of the order <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b6b29c40-5abe-4b57-aef6-5bac766d730e.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> with<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\2f22cffc-03e9-48a1-a7c8-8190c281d51f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Simulation Study</title><p>In this section, we carry out a simulation study designed to demonstrate the finite sample performance of the proposed bias reduced kernel estimator (BRK) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\692daf7d-b140-4617-a59f-cc3615c735f3.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>given in (2.4) and the proposed geometric extrapolation of bias reduced kernel estimator (GEBRK) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ab0ef8b8-6c96-4474-ae17-48f81e7257df.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>given in (3.2). Particularly, we compare their bias and MSE with the ordinary kernel density estimator (OK) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\b26b8fbb-15d5-4b18-a3d3-93326f13a924.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>in (2.1) and the geometric extrapolation of ordinary kernel estimator (GEOK) <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a23c62fb-397f-4ed3-b033-30e694e389f7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>in (3.1).</p><p>Without loss of generality, we suppose f is the standard normal density. We randomly select 1000 independent samples of size n = 20, 50, 100 or 200. We choose arbitrarily the points x = 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 and 3 at which the kernel estimators are calculated and compared. Since the properties of kernel estimators do not depend much on which particular kernel is used, we choose the standard normal as the kernel function K without loss of generality. For the bandwidth h, we use the optimal one for each individual kernel estimator. In another word, since here K is symmetric, by Remarks 2.1 and 3.2, we choose <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e47f147b-5818-4925-abfe-721546799ec0.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for OK, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\928bbb48-3fc4-404d-8b41-86181fc531ca.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>for both BRK and GEOK and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\4e704ab5-194f-4cd7-aba8-c48b4be3cc7a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for GEBRK. The bias, variance and MSE are estimated respectively by</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1050"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e4dd2e92-4608-4215-8f3a-387598a77943.png"/></disp-formula><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1051"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\e4dd2e92-4608-4215-8f3a-387598a77943.png"/></disp-formula><p>and</p><disp-formula id="scirp.47062-formula1052"><inline-graphic xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\49cf0ad8-e054-4fc5-80a5-25aca2cfdc77.png"/></disp-formula><p>where <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\1a015193-826c-4b7c-9b29-07379cacc290.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the true parameter and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\5a9ed3ff-431a-48c1-a47d-9f8f1486c391.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is the estimate value <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\c0ce1c5a-a295-4a94-9956-fc58e8bc33dd.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> based on the i-th sample. In our case, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\52d73e87-4840-4a54-b802-d371639ba5bc.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula><inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\1cb53646-7c42-43b8-9be3-372b349be76c.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>and <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\3355ee74-335c-4c24-805a-05ab966a58fe.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> is either<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\6a0d12f0-786f-41d3-9ac8-f078f139e1f1.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\c458fa78-aefe-4401-acc8-60d1462f2981.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\a931c238-4fda-44ae-b02d-6998b1a02194.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>or <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\ee30bf18-4484-471f-a59e-a3f2b3bf87e2.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> for fixed x = 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 or 3. The simu-</p><p>lation results are presented in Tables 1-7.</p><p>From Tables 1-7 we can see that BRK consistently has smaller bias and MSE than OK except for x = 1. This is simply due to the fact that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\cc2eb5d4-52e4-4065-bdf4-789fe0758d72.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> which in turn reduces the bias of OK to<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\1ce763a0-72d3-4abe-82db-d2a10e8e159f.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>. Apparently this is of the same order as the bias of BRK, however this is a special case that is only true at point x = 1 here and the</p><table-wrap id="table1"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 1</object-id><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 0</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.051923</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003405</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006101</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.028022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003849</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004644</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.036122</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003106</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004411</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.027881</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003158</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003935</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.036192</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002127</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003437</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.017092</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002105</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002397</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.025861</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001686</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002355</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.018000</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001620</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001944</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.028514</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001245</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002058</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.012703</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001132</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001294</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.021273</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000885</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001338</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.014114</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000829</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001028</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.022334</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000815</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001314</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.009988</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000691</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000791</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.017786</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000531</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000847</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.011795</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000491</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000630</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 2</object-id><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 0.5</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.035504</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003537</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004798</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.015563</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004579</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004821</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.021755</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003326</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003800</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.015037</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003978</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004204</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.022483</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002055</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002560</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.007345</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002321</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002375</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.013747</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001689</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001878</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.007874</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001904</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001966</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.017031</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001308</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001598</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.005084</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001334</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001360</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.011120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000978</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001102</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.006062</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001048</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001085</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.013480</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000816</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000998</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.003789</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000793</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000807</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.009041</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000569</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000650</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.004779</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000605</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000628</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 3</object-id><label>Table 3</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 1</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.003146</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003591</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003601</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006564</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005192</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005236</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007186</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003470</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003522</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008243</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004727</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004795</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.000313</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002001</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002001</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006093</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002522</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002560</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007797</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001668</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001729</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007741</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002177</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002237</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.000609</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001197</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001197</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004084</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001369</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001385</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006424</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000926</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000967</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.058670</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001150</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001184</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.000124</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000661</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000661</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >−0.003466</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000698</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000710</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005702</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000487</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000520</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005187</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000581</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000608</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table4"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 4</object-id><label>Table 4</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 1.5</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.019396</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002676</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003052</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.017134</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003727</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004021</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.025892</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002580</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003250</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.019406</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003468</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003845</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.013847</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001334</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001525</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.010788</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001646</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001763</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.020440</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001163</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001581</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.013526</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001486</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001669</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.020478</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000747</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000857</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007408</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000848</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000903</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.016685</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000601</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000879</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.010161</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000745</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000848</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008525</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000441</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000514</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005869</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000460</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000494</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.014117</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000324</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000523</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008425</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000389</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000460</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 5</object-id><label>Table 5</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 2</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.020056</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001439</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001862</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.012293</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001680</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001831</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.026015</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001280</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001957</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.014823</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001515</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001735</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.015395</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001068</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000912</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006896</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000758</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000806</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.019464</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001280</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001957</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008646</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000670</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000745</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.012046</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000390</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000536</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004979</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000412</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000437</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.015909</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000297</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000550</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006350</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000349</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000390</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009334</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000230</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000317</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003604</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000227</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000240</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.013159</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000164</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000337</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004859</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000189</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000213</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table6"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 6</object-id><label>Table 6</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 2.5</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.016515</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000460</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000732</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.008864</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000469</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001831</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.014181</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000533</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000734</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.010294</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000522</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000633</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.011925</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000206</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000348</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002861</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000215</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000224</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009428</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000260</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000348</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003742</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000239</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000253</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009607</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000106</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000199</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001155</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000118</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000119</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007231</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000140</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000193</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001456</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000134</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000135</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007813</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000057</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000118</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000254</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000066</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000066</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005655</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000082</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000115</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000566</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000078</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000079</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table7"  position="float"><object-id pub-id-type="pii">Table 7</object-id><label>Table 7</label><caption><p>. Bias, variance and MSE of different kernel density estimators evaluated at x = 3</p></caption><table><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Sample size</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Kernel estimator</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Bias</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variance</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >MSE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.006430</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000166</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000207</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.011847</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000197</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000338</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.007738</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000132</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000192</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.009690</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000163</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000256</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004081</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000076</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000093</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005342</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000067</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000096</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.005354</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000055</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000084</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003942</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000055</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000070</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002957</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000038</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000047</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002107</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000030</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000035</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004131</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000026</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000043</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.001226</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000024</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000026</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >200</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >OK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.002289</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000027</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000900</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000016</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000017</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEOK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.003296</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000014</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000025</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GEBRK</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000157</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000013</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000013</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>conclusion cannot be generalized. When the two estimators with geometric extrapolation are compared, GEBRK generally has smaller bias and MSE than GEOK, especially when sample size is large. When BRK and GEBRK are compared, GEBRK tends to have smaller variance and MSE but larger bias than BRK. In terms of bias, BRK and GEBRK perform much better than OK and GEOK while BRK and GEBRK are very competitive. Geometric extrapolation reduces the variance and MSE in general, i.e. GEOK and GEBRK perform better than OK and BRK in terms of variance and MSE. When MSE is concerned, GEBRK performs best and then GEOK. These observations are somehow different at point x = 1 due to the fact that <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://file.scirp.org/Html/htmlimages\5-7402158x\717f9db2-920b-4256-ab8a-91e8ac7fb50a.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> as mentioned above.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Concluding Remarks</title><p>In this paper, we first propose a very intuitive and feasible kernel density estimator which reduces the bias and MSE significantly compared with the ordinary kernel density estimator. Secondly, we construct a geometric extrapolation of the bias reduced kernel estimator which further improves the convergence rates of both bias and MSE. Our simulation study shows that for finite sample size both estimators perform competitively well and better than the ordinary kernel estimator and its geometric extrapolation.</p><p>For the bias reduced kernel density estimator presented in Section 2, we may find that part of the curve is under zero, especially at the tails. Taking standard normal density as an example, at point x = 4 the estimator may give a negative value. Apparently, this is unreasonable. Though in Remark 2.2 we suggest a modified version of the estimator, further work is necessary to deal with this problem.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors acknowledge with gratitude the support of this research by Discovery Grants from National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada, and would like to thank the anonymous referees for their constructive comments.</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.47062-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>FARRELL</surname><given-names> R.H. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1972</year>)<article-title>ON THE BEST OBTAINABLE ASYMPTOTIC RATES OF CONVERGENCE IN ESTIMATION OF A DENSITY FUNCTION AT A POINT</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF MATHEMATICS AND STATISTICS</source><volume> 43</volume>,<fpage> 170</fpage>-<lpage>180</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOMS/1177692711</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>TERRELL</surname><given-names> G.R. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> SCOTT</surname><given-names> D.W. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1980</year>)<article-title>ON IMPROVING CONVERGENCE RATES FOR NONNEGATIVE KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATORS</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF STATISTICS</source><volume> 8</volume>,<fpage> 1160</fpage>-<lpage>1163</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOS/1176345153</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>HALL</surname><given-names> P. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> MARRON</surname><given-names> J.S. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1988</year>)<article-title>CHOICE OF KERNEL ORDER IN DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF STATISTICS</source><volume> 16</volume>,<fpage> 161</fpage>-<lpage>173</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOS/1176350697</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ABRAMSON</surname><given-names> I.S. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1982</year>)<article-title>ON BANDWIDTH VARIATION IN KERNEL ESTIMATES—A SQUARE ROOT LAW</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF STATISTICS</source><volume> 10</volume>,<fpage> 1217</fpage>-<lpage>1223</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOS/1176345986</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>SAMIUDDIN</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> EL-SAYYAD</surname><given-names> G.M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1990</year>)<article-title>ON NONPARAMETRIC KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATES</article-title><source> BIOMETRICA</source><volume> 77</volume>,<fpage> 865</fpage>-<lpage>874</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1093/BIOMET/77.4.865</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>EL-SAYYAD</surname><given-names> G.M.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> SAMIUDDIN</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> ABDEL-GHALY</surname><given-names> A.A. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1992</year>)<article-title>A NEW KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATE</article-title><source> JOURNAL OF NONPARAMETRIC STATISTICS</source><volume> 3</volume>,<fpage> 1</fpage>-<lpage>11</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1080/10485259308832568</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>CHENG</surname><given-names> M.Y.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> CHOI</surname><given-names> E.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> FAN</surname><given-names> J. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> HALL</surname><given-names> P. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2000</year>)<article-title>SKEWING METHODS FOR TWO-PARAMETER LOCALLY PARAMETRIC DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> BERNOULLI</source><volume> 6</volume>,<fpage> 169</fpage>-<lpage>182</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.2307/3318637</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>MARRON</surname><given-names> J.S. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> RUPPERT</surname><given-names> D. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1992</year>)<article-title>MARRON, J.S. AND RUPPERT, D.  TRANSFORMATIONS TO REDUCE BOUNDARY BIAS IN KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY: SERIES B</source><volume> 4</volume>,<fpage> 653</fpage>-<lpage>671</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>RUPPERT</surname><given-names> D. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> CLINE</surname><given-names> D.B.H. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1994</year>)<article-title>BIAS REDUCTION IN KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION BY SMOOTHED EMPIRICAL TRANSFORMATIONS</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF STATISTICS</source><volume> 22</volume>,<fpage> 185</fpage>-<lpage>210</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOS/1176325365</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>JONES</surname><given-names> M.C.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> LINTON</surname><given-names> O. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> NIELSEN</surname><given-names> J.P. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1995</year>)<article-title>A SIMPLE BIAS REDUCTION METHOD FOR DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> BIOMETRICA</source><volume> 82</volume>,<fpage> 327</fpage>-<lpage>338</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1093/BIOMET/82.2.327</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>KIM</surname><given-names> C.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> KIM</surname><given-names> W. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> PARK</surname><given-names> B.U. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2003</year>)<article-title>SKEWING AND GENERALIZED JACKKNIFING IN KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS: THEORY AND METHODS</source><volume> 32</volume>,<fpage> 2153</fpage>-<lpage>2162</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1081/STA-120024473</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>MYNBAEV</surname><given-names> K. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> MARTINS-FILHO</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2010</year>)<article-title>BIAS REDUCTION IN KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION VIA LIPSCHITZ CONDITION</article-title><source> JOURNAL OF NONPARAMETRIC STATISTICS</source><volume> 22</volume>,<fpage> 219</fpage>-<lpage>235</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1080/10485250903266058</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>SRIHERA</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> STUTE</surname><given-names> W. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2011</year>)<article-title>KERNEL ADJUSTED DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> STATISTICS AND PROBABILITY LETTERS</source><volume> 81</volume>,<fpage> 571</fpage>-<lpage>579</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1016/J.SPL.2011.01.013</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>CHENG</surname><given-names> M.Y.</given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> PENG</surname><given-names> L. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> WU</surname><given-names> S.H. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2007</year>)<article-title>REDUCING VARIANCE IN UNIVARIATE SMOOTHING</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF STATISTICS</source><volume> 35</volume>,<fpage> 522</fpage>-<lpage>542</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/009053606000001398</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>KIM</surname><given-names> J. </given-names></name>,<name name-style="western"><surname> KIM</surname><given-names> C. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2013</year>)<article-title>REDUCING THE MEAN SQUARED ERROR IN KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATION</article-title><source> JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN STATISTICAL SOCIETY</source><volume> 42</volume>,<fpage> 387</fpage>-<lpage>397</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1016/J.JKSS.2012.12.003</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ROSENBLATT</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1956</year>)<article-title>REMARKS ON SOME NONPARAMETRIC ESTIMATES OF A DENSITY FUNCTION</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS</source><volume> 27</volume>,<fpage> 832</fpage>-<lpage>837</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOMS/1177728190</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>PARZEN</surname><given-names> E. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1962</year>)<article-title>ON ESTIMATION OF A PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION AND THE MODE</article-title><source> THE ANNALS OF MATHEMATICAL STATISTICS</source><volume> 33</volume>,<fpage> 1065</fpage>-<lpage>1076</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1214/AOMS/1177704472</pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">SILVERMAN, B.W. (1986) DENSITY ESTIMATION FOR STATISTICS AND DATA ANALYSIS. CHAPMAN &amp; HALL, LONDON. 
HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1007/978-1-4899-3324-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.47062-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">WAND, M.P. AND JONES, M.C. (1995) KERNEL SMOOTHING. CHAPMAN &amp; HALL, LONDON. 
HTTP://DX.DOI.ORG/10.1007/978-1-4899-4493-1</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>