MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005599694 · doi:10.1080/00949650108812122

Properties of robust m-estimators for poisson and negative binomial data

2001· article· en· W2005599694 on OpenAlexaffabout
Noel G. Cadigan, J. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoisson distributionNegative binomial distributionOutlierMathematicsStatisticsEstimatorCount dataDispersion (optics)Independent and identically distributed random variablesEconometricsBinomial distributionSample (material)Random variablePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate robust M-estimators of location and over-dispersion for independent and identically distributed samples from Poisson and Negative Binomial (NB)distributions. We focus on asymptotic and small-sample efficiencies, outlier-induced biases, and biases caused by model mis-specification. This is important information for assessing the practical utility of the estimation method. Our results demonstrate that resonably efficient estimation of location and over-dispersion parameters for count data is possible with samples sizes as small as n=25. The sensitivity of these stimators, especially when the amount of over-dispersion is small. We aslo conclude that serious biases result when using robust Poisson M-estimation with NB data. The biases are less serious when using robust NB M-estimation with Poisson data.

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)0.298
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.298
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.338
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.132 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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