MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992259016 · doi:10.1081/sta-120022711

Jackknife Estimation for Smooth Functions of the Parametric Component in Partially Linear Regression Models

2003· article· en· W1992259016 on OpenAlexaff
Jinhong You, Gemai Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJackknife resamplingEstimatorMathematicsNonparametric statisticsStatisticsDelta methodParametric statisticsComponent (thermodynamics)Variance (accounting)M-estimatorApplied mathematicsLinear regressionSemiparametric regressionEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is known that due to the existence of the nonparametric component, the usual estimators for the parametric component or its function in partially linear regression models are biased. Sometimes this bias is severe. To reduce the bias, we propose two jackknife estimators and compare them with the naive estimator. All three estimators are shown to be asymptotically equivalent and asymptotically normally distributed under some regularity conditions. However, through simulation we demonstrate that the jackknife estimators perform better than the naive estimator in terms of bias when the sample size is small to moderate. To make our results more useful, we also construct consistent estimators of the asymptotic variance, which are robust against heterogeneity of the error variances.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207