A unified approach to robust estimation in finite population sampling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We argue that the conditional bias associated with a sample unit can be a useful measure of influence in finite population sampling. We use the conditional bias to derive robust estimators that are obtained by downweighting the most influential sample units. Under the model-based approach to inference, our proposed robust estimator is closely related to the well-known estimator of Chambers (1986). Under the design-based approach, it possesses the desirable feature of being applicable with most sampling designs used in practice. For stratified simple random sampling, it is essentially equivalent to the estimator of Kokic & Bell (1994). The proposed robust estimator depends on a tuning constant. In this paper, we propose a method for determining the tuning constant and show that the resulting estimator is consistent. Results from a simulation study suggest that our approach improves the efficiency of standard nonrobust estimators when the population contains units that may be influential if selected in the sample.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it