  This paper is an attempt to set a justification for making use of some
dicrepancy indexes, starting from the classical Maximum Likelihood definition,
and adapting the corresponding basic principle of inference to situations where
minimization of those indexes between a model and some extension of the
empirical measure of the data appears as its natural extension. This leads to
the so called generalized bootstrap setting for which minimum divergence
inference seems to replace Maximum Likelihood one. 1 Motivation and context
Divergences between probability measures are widely used in Statistics and Data
Science in order to perform inference under models of various kinds,
paramet-ric or semi parametric, or even in non parametric settings. The
corresponding methods extend the likelihood paradigm and insert inference in
some minimum "distance" framing, which provides a convenient description for
the properties of the resulting estimators and tests, under the model or under
misspecifica-tion. Furthermore they pave the way to a large number of
competitive methods , which allows for trade-off between efficiency and
robustness, among others. Many families of such divergences have been proposed,
some of them stemming from classical statistics (such as the Chi-square), while
others have their origin in other fields such as Information theory. Some
measures of discrepancy involve regularity of the corresponding probability
measures while others seem to be restricted to measures on finite or countable
spaces, at least when using them as inferential tools, henceforth in situations
when the elements of a model have to be confronted with a dataset. The choice
of a specific discrepancy measure in specific context is somehow arbitrary in
many cases, although the resulting conclusion of the inference might differ
accordingly, above all under misspecification; however the need for such
approaches is clear when aiming at robustness.
