Applicability of prewhitening to eliminate the influence of serial correlation on the Mann‐Kendall test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prewhitening has been used to eliminate the influence of serial correlation on the Mann‐Kendall (MK) test in trend‐detection studies of hydrological time series. However, its ability to accomplish such a task has not been well documented. This study investigates this issue by Monte Carlo simulation. Simulated time series consist of a linear trend and a lag 1 autoregressive (AR(1)) process with a noise. Simulation results demonstrate that when trend exists in a time series, the effect of positive/negative serial correlation on the MK test is dependent upon sample size, magnitude of serial correlation, and magnitude of trend. When sample size and magnitude of trend are large enough, serial correlation no longer significantly affects the MK test statistics. Removal of positive AR(1) from time series by prewhitening will remove a portion of trend and hence reduces the possibility of rejecting the null hypothesis while it might be false. Contrarily, removal of negative AR(1) by prewhitening will inflate trend and leads to an increase in the possibility of rejecting the null hypothesis while it might be true. Therefore, prewhitening is not suitable for eliminating the effect of serial correlation on the MK test when trend exists within a time series.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.168 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".