MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1822380841 · doi:10.5539/mas.v9n11p51

Winsorized Modified One Step M-estimator in Alexander-Govern Test

2015· article· en· W1822380841 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsEstimatorMathematicsTruncated meanType I and type II errorsSample size determinationAnalysis of varianceParametric statisticsNormal distribution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research centres on independent group test of comparing two or more means by using the parametric method, namely the Alexander-Govern test. The Alexander-Govern (<em>AG</em>) test uses mean as a measure of its central tendency. It is a better alternative to the Welch test, James test and the <em>ANOVA</em>, because it has a good control of Type I error rates and produces a high power efficient for a normal data under variance heterogeneity, but not for non-normal data. As a result, trimmed mean was applied on the test under non-normal data for two group condition, but as the number of groups increased above two, the test fails to be robust. Due to this, when the <em>MOM</em> estimator was applied on the test, it was not influenced by the number of groups, but failed to give a good control of Type I error rates under skewed heavy tailed distribution. In this research, the Winsorized <em>MOM</em> estimator was applied in <em>AG</em> test as a measure of its central tendency. 5,000 data sets were simulated and analysed using Statistical Analysis Software (<em>SAS</em>). The result shows that with the pairing of unbalanced sample size with unequal variance of (1:36) and the combination of both balanced and unbalanced sample sizes with both equal and unequal variances, under six group condition, for g = 0.5 and h = 0.5, for both positive and negative pairing condition, the test gives a remarkable control of Type I error rates. In overall, the <em>AGWMOM</em> test has the best control of Type I error rates, across the distributions and across the groups, compared to the <em>AG</em> test, the <em>AGMOM</em> test and the <em>ANOVA</em>.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.240
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it