Inference for single and multiple change‐points in time series
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article reviews methods of inference for single and multiple change‐points in time series, when data are of retrospective (off‐line) type. The inferential methods reviewed for a single change‐point in time series include likelihood, Bayes, Bayes‐type and some relevant non‐parametric methods. Inference for multiple change‐points requires methods that can handle large data sets and can be implemented efficiently for estimating the number of change‐points as well as their locations. Our review in this important area focuses on some of the recent advances in this direction. Greater emphasis is placed on multivariate data while reviewing inferential methods for a single change‐point in time series. Throughout the article, more attention is paid to estimation of unknown change‐point(s) in time series, and this is especially true in the case of multiple change‐points. Some specific data sets for which change‐point modelling has been carried out in the literature are provided as illustrative examples under both single and multiple change‐point scenarios.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it