MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033548285 · doi:10.1002/env.1108

Statistical inference in Lombard's smooth‐change model

2011· article· en· W2033548285 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

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalStatistics CanadaUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorEconometricsInferenceStatisticsVariance (accounting)MathematicsStatistical inferenceRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The sample properties of various inference procedures in Lombard's smooth‐change model are studied in this work. In particular, the power of six test statistics for the detection of change‐points in the mean and the variance of a series of independent observations is investigated under several alternatives. The robustness of the procedures under heterogeneity and serial dependence is considered as well. An investigation of the efficiency of an estimator of the change‐points is also presented. Conditional on these estimated change‐points, least squares estimators of the means in Lombard's model are derived and their efficiency is carefully studied. The procedures are illustrated on two environmental data sets, namely the annual volume of discharge from the Nile River and the annual temperature anomalies for the northern hemisphere. It will be seen that Lombard's model is flexible, that the test statistics of Lombard (1987) are powerful, and that the proposed estimators have nice properties; hence Lombard's model has a high potential for applications in the environmental sciences. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.391
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.002 · 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