MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094029434 · doi:10.1155/2012/537474

Testing Homogeneity in a Semiparametric Two-Sample Problem

2012· article· en· W2094029434 on OpenAlexaff
Yukun Liu, Pengfei Li, Yuejiao Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Probability and Statistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a two-sample homogeneity testing problem, in which one sample comes from a population with density<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math>and the other is from a mixture population with mixture density<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mi>λ</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>λ</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:math>. This problem arises naturally from many statistical applications such as test for partial differential gene expression in microarray study or genetic studies for gene mutation. Under the semiparametric assumption<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>α</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>β</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math>, a penalized empirical likelihood ratio test could be constructed, but its implementation is hindered by the fact that there is neither feasible algorithm for computing the test statistic nor available research results on its theoretical properties. To circumvent these difficulties, we propose an EM test based on the penalized empirical likelihood. We prove that the EM test has a simple chi-square limiting distribution, and we also demonstrate its competitive testing performances by simulations. A real-data example is used to illustrate the proposed methodology.

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)0.085
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.271
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0850.271
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Probability and StatisticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207