A common approach to evaluating the significance of a collection of $p$-values combines them with a pooling function, in particular when the original data are not available. These pooled $p$-values convert a sample of $p$-values into a single number which behaves like a univariate $p$-value. To clarify discussion of these functions, a telescoping series of alternative hypotheses are introduced that communicate the strength and prevalence of non-null evidence in the $p$-values before general pooling formulae are discussed. A pattern noticed in the UMP pooled $p$-value for a particular alternative motivates the definition and discussion of central and marginal rejection levels at $\alpha$. It is proven that central rejection is always greater than or equal to marginal rejection, motivating a quotient to measure the balance between the two for pooled $p$-values. A combining function based on the $\chi^2_{\kappa}$ quantile transformation is proposed to control this quotient and shown to be robust to mis-specified parameters relative to the UMP. Different powers for different parameter settings motivate a map of plausible alternatives based on where this pooled $p$-value is minimized.

Building reliable AI decision support systems requires a robust set of data on which to train models; both with respect to quantity and diversity. Obtaining such datasets can be difficult in resource limited settings, or for applications in early stages of deployment. Sample rejection is one way to work around this challenge, however much of the existing work in this area is ill-suited for such scenarios. This paper substantiates that position and proposes a simple solution as a proof of concept baseline.