MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980718017 · doi:10.1080/00949655.2014.933223

Confidence sets based on the positive part James–Stein estimator with the asymptotically constant coverage probability

2014· article· en· W1980718017 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ejaz Ahmed, I. A. Kareev, Sujitta Suraphee, Andrei Volodin, И. Н. Володин

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaRegional Municipality of NiagaraBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorStatisticsConstant (computer programming)Confidence intervalApplied mathematicsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The asymptotic expansions for the coverage probability of a confidence set centred at the James–Stein estimator presented in our previous publications show that this probability depends on the non-centrality parameter τ2 (the sum of the squares of the means of normal distributions). In this paper we establish how these expansions can be used for a construction of confidence region with constant confidence level, which is asymptotically (the same formula for both case τ→0 and τ→∞) equal to some fixed value 1−α. We establish the shrinkage rate for the confidence region according to the growth of the dimension p and also the value of τ for which we observe quick decreasing of the coverage probability to the nominal level 1−α. When p→∞ this value of τ increases as O(p1/4). The accuracy of the results obtained is shown by the Monte-Carlo statistical simulations.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.127
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistical Computation and SimulationSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207