A Statistical Test of Change‐Point in Mean that Almost Surely Has Zero Error Probabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary In this paper we develop a non‐conventional statistical test for the change‐point in a mean model by making use of an almost‐sure (a.s.) convergence (or strong convergence) result that we obtain, in respect of the difference between the sums of squared residuals under the null and alternative hypotheses. We prove that both types of error probabilities of the new test converge to zero almost surely when the sample size goes to infinity. This result does not hold for any conventional statistical test where the type I error probability, i.e. the significance level or the size, is prescribed at a low but non‐zero level (e.g. 0.05). The test developed is easy to use in practice, and is ready to be generalised to other change‐point models provided that the relevant almost‐sure convergence results are available. We also provide a simulation study in the paper to compare the new and conventional tests under different data scenarios. The results obtained are consistent with our asymptotic study. In addition we provide least squares estimators of those parameters used in the change‐point test together with their almost‐sure convergence properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.048 | 0.278 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".