MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the arbitrariness of some asymptotic test statistics based on generalized inverses

2005· article· en· W2006834884 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometrics Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsAncillary statisticEstimatorStatisticCompleteness (order theory)PRESS statisticTest statisticSufficient statisticWeightingApplied mathematicsStatistical hypothesis testingMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under appropriate conditions, some asymptotic test statistics based on generalized inverses (g‐inverses) are shown to be arbitrary in the sense that any desired numerical value for a statistic can be obtained by appropriately choosing a g‐inverse of an estimator. Examples of statistics based on g‐inverses include score‐type and Hausman‐type statistics. Some versions of these statistics considered in the literature can be viewed as polar cases in the sense that their weighting matrices have either minimum or maximum rank. By associating a statistic with an estimator of a variance‐covariance matrix and by appropriately choosing the estimator, it is possible to construct a statistic that is invariant with respect to the choice of a g‐inverse of the estimator.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.218 · 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