Results concerning the generalized partially linear single-index model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The central topic of this article is the estimation of parameters of the generalized partially linear single-index model (GPLSIM). Two numerical optimization procedures are presented and an S-plus program based on these procedures is compared to a program by Wand in a simulation setting. The results from these simulations indicate that the estimates for the new procedures are as good, if not better, than Wand's. Also, this program is much more flexible than Wand's since it can handle more general models. Other simulations are also conducted. The first compares the effects of using linear interpolation versus spline interpolation in an optimization procedure. The results indicate that by using spline interpolation one gets more stable estimates at a cost of increased computational time. A second simulation was conducted to assess the performance of a method for estimating the variance of alpha. A third set of simulations is carried out to determine the best criterion for testing that one of the elements of alpha is equal to zero. The GPLSIM is applied to a water quality data set and the results indicate an interesting relationship between gastrointestinal illness and turbidity (cloudiness) of drinking water.
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 | 0.005 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".