MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974786680 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v2n2p102

A Note on Bivariate Smoothing for Two-Dimensional Functional Data

2013· article· en· W1974786680 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrada E. Ivanescu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivariate analysisSmoothingFunctional data analysisPointwiseMathematicsCovariateScalar (mathematics)EconometricsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we study a bivariate smoothing approach for estimating multiple functional parameters for functional data with a two-dimensional domain. We present a penalized regression framework for smoothing with the purpose to: (a) facilitate the estimation of the smooth overall bivariate mean function of two-dimensional functional data, (b) enable the estimation of the functional effect of a scalar covariate, (c) accommodate completely or incompletely sampled data, (d) implement the fitting approach using available statistical software, and (e) construct pointwise approximate confidence intervals for multiple bivariate functional parameters. Implementation results from simulation studies show that these methods perform very well in practice. We illustrate the usefulness of the bivariate smoothing approach to several real datasets, including applications to electricity demand.

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.128
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.128
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207