MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SAMPLING AND ESTIMATION IN THE PRESENCE OF CUT‐OFF SAMPLING

2010· article· en· W2018536683 on OpenAlexaff
David Haziza, Guillaume Chauvet, Jean‐Claude Deville

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSampling (signal processing)StatisticsEstimatorSampling biasSampling designSample (material)Selection (genetic algorithm)Sample size determinationCalibrationSet (abstract data type)PopulationSelection biasProbability samplingCluster samplingComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Cut‐off sampling consists of deliberately excluding a set of units from possible selection in a sample, for example if the contribution of the excluded units to the total is small or if the inclusion of these units in the sample involves high costs. If the characteristics of interest of the excluded units differ from those of the rest of the population, the use of naïve estimators may result in highly biased estimates. In this paper, we discuss the use of auxiliary information to reduce the bias by means of calibration and balanced sampling. We show that the use of the available auxiliary information related to both the variable of interest and the probability of being excluded enables us to reduce the potential bias. A short numerical study supports our findings.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of StatisticsSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207