In this paper we propose a class of sequential urn designs based on generalized Pólya urn (GPU) models for balancing the allocations of two treatments in sequential clinical trials. In particular, we consider a GPU model characterized by a 2 x 2 random addition matrix with null balance (i.e. null row sums) and replacement rule depending upon the urn composition. Under this scheme, the urn process has a Markovian structure and can be regarded as a random extension of the classical Ehrenfest model. We establish almost sure convergence and asymptotic normality for the frequency of treatment allocations and show that in some peculiar cases the asymptotic variance of the design admits a natural representation based on the set of orthogonal polynomials associated with the corresponding Markov process.

We consider a controlled i.i.d. process, where several i.i.d. sources are sampled sequentially. At each time instant, a controller determines from which source to obtain the next sample. Any causal sampling policy, possibly history-dependent, may be employed. The purpose is to characterize the extremal large deviations of the sample mean, namely to obtain asymptotic rate bounds (similar to and extending Cramér's theorem) which hold uniformly over all sampling policies. Lower and upper bounds are obtained, and it is shown that in many (but not all) cases stationary sampling policies are sufficient to obtain the extremal large deviations rates. These results are applied to a hypothesis testing problem, where data samples may be sequentially chosen from several i.i.d. sources (representing different types of experiments). The analysis provides asymptotic estimates for the error probabilities, corresponding both to optimal and to worst-case sampling policies.

In a series of papers Whittle has proposed locating the optimal boundary between the continuation region and the stopping region, in the no-overshoot approximation, for a class of sequential analysis problems by using the criterion that the gradient of the objective function must be continuous at the boundary. It is shown here that the result originally proposed by Whittle is not true in the generality which he supposed, and an indication is given of some of the circumstances in which it does hold.