MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082271139 · doi:10.2307/3316056

On the robustness of empirical likelihood ratio confidence intervals for location

2001· article· en· W2082271139 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Min Tsao, Julie Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConfidence intervalRobustness (evolution)MathematicsStatisticsPoint estimationTolerance intervalConfidence regionInterval (graph theory)CombinatoricsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors examine the robustness of empirical likelihood ratio (ELR) confidence intervals for the mean and M‐estimate of location. They show that the ELR interval for the mean has an asymptotic breakdown point of zero. They also give a formula for computing the breakdown point of the ELR interval for M‐estimate. Through a numerical study, they further examine the relative advantages of the ELR interval to the commonly used confidence intervals based on the asymptotic distribution of the M‐estimate.

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)0.101
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.690
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1010.690
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0040.005
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
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

Citations18
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207