A Laguerre polynomial approximation for a goodness-of-fit test for exponential distribution based on progressively censored data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes an approximation to the distribution of a goodness-of-fit statistic proposed recently by Balakrishnan et al. [Balakrishnan, N., Ng, H.K.T. and Kannan, N., 2002, A test of exponentiality based on spacings for progressively Type-II censored data. In: C. Huber-Carol et al. (Eds.), Goodness-of-Fit Tests and Model Validity (Boston: Birkhäuser), pp. 89–111.] for testing exponentiality based on progressively Type-II right censored data. The moments of this statistic can be easily calculated, but its distribution is not known in an explicit form. We first obtain the exact moments of the statistic using Basu's theorem and then the density approximants based on these exact moments of the statistic, expressed in terms of Laguerre polynomials, are proposed. A comparative study of the proposed approximation to the exact critical values, computed by Balakrishnan and Lin [Balakrishnan, N. and Lin, C.T., 2003, On the distribution of a test for exponentiality based on progressively Type-II right censored spacings. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 73 (4), 277–283.], is carried out. This reveals that the proposed approximation is very accurate.
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 | 0.010 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".