MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009922756 · doi:10.3103/s1066530708040066

Models with a Kronecker product covariance structure: Estimation and testing

2008· article· en· W2009922756 on OpenAlexaff
Muni S. Srivastava, Tatjana von Rosen, Dietrich von Rosen

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Methods of Statistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsKronecker productEstimatorCovariance matrixCovarianceRestricted maximum likelihoodLikelihood-ratio testMultivariate random variableApplied mathematicsStatisticsM-estimatorCombinatoricsMaximum likelihoodKronecker deltaRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we consider a pq-dimensional random vector x distributed normally with mean vector θ and covariance matrix Λ assumed to be positive definite. On the basis of N independent observations on the random vector x, we want to estimate parameters and test the hypothesis H: Λ = Ψ ⊗ Σ, where Ψ = (ψ ij ): q × q, ψ qq = 1, and Σ = (σ ij ): p × p, and Λ = (ψ ij Σ), the Kronecker product of Ψ and Σ. That is instead of 1/2pq(pq + 1) parameters, it has only 1/2p(p + 1) + 1/2q(q + 1) − 1 parameters. A test based on the likelihood ratio is given to check if this model holds. And, when this model holds, we test the hypothesis that Ψ is a matrix with intraclass correlation structure. The maximum likelihood estimators (MLE) are obtained under the hypothesis as well as under the alternatives. Using these estimators the likelihood ratio tests (LRT) are obtained. One of the main objects of the paper is to show that the likelihood equations provide unique estimators.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.175
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.175
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations145
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Methods of StatisticsSame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207