MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1901230542 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11211

Minimum profile Hellinger distance estimation for a semiparametric mixture model

2014· article· en· W1901230542 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sijia Xiang, Weixin Yao, Jingjing Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHellinger distanceEstimatorSemiparametric regressionCluster analysisComponent (thermodynamics)Mixture modelMathematicsSemiparametric modelStatisticsComputer scienceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we propose a new effective estimator for a class of semiparametric mixture models where one component has known distribution with possibly unknown parameters while the other component density and the mixing proportion are unknown. Such semiparametric mixture models have been often used in multiple hypothesis testing and the sequential clustering algorithm. The proposed estimator is based on the minimum profile Hellinger distance (MPHD), and its theoretical properties are investigated. In addition, we use simulation studies to illustrate the finite sample performance of the MPHD estimator and compare it with some other existing approaches. The empirical studies demonstrate that the new method outperforms existing estimators when data are generated under contamination and works comparably to existing estimators when data are not contaminated. Applications to two real data sets are also provided to illustrate the effectiveness of the new methodology.The Canadian Journal of Statistics42: 246–267; 2014 © 2014 Statistical Society of Canada

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207