MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094129355 · doi:10.1002/cjs.10104

Self-consistent estimation of mean response functions and their derivatives

2011· article· en· W2094129355 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Richard Charnigo, Cidambi Srinivasan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEstimationMathematicsStatisticsApplied mathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many methods have been developed for the nonparametric estimation of a mean response function, but most of these methods do not lend themselves to simultaneous estimation of the mean response function and its derivatives. Recovering derivatives is important for analyzing human growth data, studying physical systems described by differential equations, and characterizing nanoparticles from scattering data. In this article the authors propose a new compound estimator that synthesizes information from numerous pointwise estimators indexed by a discrete set. Unlike spline and kernel smooths, the compound estimator is infinitely differentiable; unlike local regression smooths, the compound estimator is self-consistent in that its derivatives estimate the derivatives of the mean response function. The authors show that the compound estimator and its derivatives can attain essentially optimal convergence rates in consistency. The authors also provide a filtration and extrapolation enhancement for finite samples, and the authors assess the empirical performance of the compound estimator and its derivatives via a simulation study and an application to real data. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 39: 280–299; 2011 © 2011 Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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