MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968372036 · doi:10.1081/sac-120028440

Testing for No Effect in Functional Linear Regression Models, Some Computational Approaches

2004· article· en· W1968372036 on OpenAlexaff
Hervé Cardot, Aldo Goia, Pascal Sarda

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest statisticMathematicsLinear regressionCovarianceCovariateResamplingFunctional data analysisLinear modelStatisticsProper linear modelPermutation (music)Regression analysisStatisticStatistical hypothesis testingBayesian multivariate linear regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The functional linear regression model is a regression model where the link between the response (a scalar) and the predictor (a random function) is expressed as an inner product between a functional coefficient and the predictor. Our aim is to test at first for no effect of the model, i.e., the nullity of the functional coefficient. A fully automatic permutation test based on the cross covariance operator of the predictor and the response is proposed. The model can be, in an obvious way, extended to the case of several functional predictors. When testing for no effect of some covariate on the response the permutation test is no longer valid. An alternative pseudo-likelihood ratio test statistic is then introduced. The procedure can be applied in some way to test partial nullity of a functional coefficient. All procedures are illustrated and compared by means of simulation studies.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.132
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.132
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.493
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.004 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations43
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Statistics - Simulation and ComputationSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207