Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Small area estimation has received considerable attention in recent years because of growing demand for small area statistics. Basic area‐level and unit‐level models have been studied in the literature to obtain empirical best linear unbiased prediction (EBLUP) estimators of small area means. Although this classical method is useful for estimating the small area means efficiently under normality assumptions, it can be highly influenced by the presence of outliers in the data. In this article, the authors investigate the robustness properties of the classical estimators and propose a resistant method for small area estimation, which is useful for downweighting any influential observations in the data when estimating the model parameters. To estimate the mean squared errors of the robust estimators of small area means, a parametric bootstrap method is adopted here, which is applicable to models with block diagonal covariance structures. Simulations are carried out to study the behaviour of the proposed robust estimators in the presence of outliers, and these estimators are also compared to the EBLUP estimators. Performance of the bootstrap mean squared error estimator is also investigated in the simulation study. The proposed robust method is also applied to some real data to estimate crop areas for counties in Iowa, using farm‐interview data on crop areas and LANDSAT satellite data as auxiliary information. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 37: 381–399; 2009 © 2009 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".