Write , and . The joint probability density factors as
By the Fisher-Neyman factorization theorem, is a sufficient statistic. The same factorization shows that the smaller statistic is also a sufficient statistic. This gives the sufficient statistic for a symmetric uniform sample.
In fact, the likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency identifies as a minimal sufficient statistic: two sample points with the same have identical likelihoods for all ; with different , their likelihoods have different parameter supports, and so are not proportional as functions of . Equivalently, the condition that for every and some positive constant holds exactly when their absolute maxima agree.
To see rigorously that cannot be recovered from almost surely, fix any . The sample has a distribution invariant under simultaneous sign reversal. If almost surely, the same identity would hold for the sign-reversed sample on another probability-one set. Since is unchanged by sign reversal, it would follow that
and hence almost surely. But this event has probability zero for a finite sample from a continuous uniform distribution: it entails for some pair of indices, including the possible case . Therefore is not a function of the sufficient statistic . The pair of extrema is not minimally sufficient, for every , even though it is sufficient.
A sufficient statistic has a conditional distribution of the full data given its value that is independent of the unknown parameter. A minimal sufficient statistic is sufficient and is a function of every other sufficient statistic, up to null sets. For a dominated family with common positive support, the likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency states that is minimal sufficient if holds exactly when is independent of .
For , the joint probability mass function is
The Fisher-Neyman factorization theorem proves sufficiency of . For two samples, the likelihood ratio is , independent of exactly when their sums agree. Thus is minimal sufficient. Any one-to-one transformation of it is also minimal sufficient, so choose
This chosen estimator is an unbiased estimator, since each observation has mean . If instead the statistic is reported as , its expectation is , and as an estimator of it has bias (zero only when ). Being a minimal sufficient statistic is unchanged by this rescaling; being an unbiased estimator is not.
For , define the class degree sum
and define the number of within-college friendships by
Each between-college edge contributes once to the degree sum of each endpoint's college, while each within-college edge contributes twice to its college's degree sum. The model-3 likelihood can therefore be written
The Fisher-Neyman factorization theorem shows that is sufficient.
For two networks , the likelihood ratio is
Because the parameters range independently over , this ratio is constant in exactly when every displayed difference vanishes. The likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency therefore gives the answer
This is the degree-sum sufficient statistic for an additive logistic network model.
Expanding the exponent gives
The Fisher-Neyman factorization theorem therefore shows that is sufficient.
It is also minimal sufficient. For two sample points ,
where is independent of . This ratio is independent of exactly when . The likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency applies, proving the claim and the general normal sample sum with known variance result in this case.
A sufficient statistic is minimal sufficient if it is a function of every other sufficient statistic: whenever is sufficient, there is a function such that almost surely, up to the usual null-set qualification. Thus its level sets give the coarsest sufficient partition of the sample space. In a dominated family with positive densities, the likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency says that is minimal sufficient when
For , the density is
so the Fisher-Neyman factorization theorem proves that is sufficient.
Moreover,
is independent of exactly when , equivalently . The likelihood-ratio criterion for minimal sufficiency therefore proves that