MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimation of regression and dynamic dependence paremeters for non‐stationary multinomial time series

2012· article· en· W1836995708 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Time Series Analysis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariateEstimatorMathematicsStatisticsEconometricsRealization (probability)Multinomial logistic regressionMultinomial distribution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a time‐series regression setup, multinomial responses along with time dependent observable covariates are usually modelled by certain suitable dynamic multinomial logistic probabilities. Frequently, the time‐dependent covariates are treated as a realization of an exogenous random process and one is interested in the estimation of both the regression and the dynamic dependence parameters conditional on this realization of the covariate process. There exists a partial likelihood estimation approach able to deal with the general dependence structures arising from the influence of both past covariates and past multinomial responses on the covariates at a given time by sequentially conditioning on the history of the joint process (response and covariates), but it provides standard errors for the estimators based on the observed information matrix, because such a matrix happens to be the Fisher information matrix obtained by conditioning on the whole history of the joint process. This limitation of the partial likelihood approach holds even if the covariate history is not influeced by lagged response outcomes. In this article, a general formulation of the auto‐covariance structure of a multinomial time series is presented and used to derive an explicit expression for the Fisher information matrix conditional on the covariate history, providing the possibility of computing the variance of the maximum likelihood estimators given a realization of the covariate process for the multinomial‐logistic model. The difference between the standard errors of the parameter estimators under these two conditioning schemes (covariates Vs. joint history) is illustrated through an intensive simulation study based on the premise of an exogenous covariate process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.324 · 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