Alternatives to the Chi-Square Test for Evaluating Rank Histograms from Ensemble Forecasts
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
Abstract Rank histograms are a commonly used tool for evaluating an ensemble forecasting system’s performance. Because the sample size is finite, the rank histogram is subject to statistical fluctuations, so a goodness-of-fit (GOF) test is employed to determine if the rank histogram is uniform to within some statistical certainty. Most often, the χ2 test is used to test whether the rank histogram is indistinguishable from a discrete uniform distribution. However, the χ2 test is insensitive to order and so suffers from troubling deficiencies that may render it unsuitable for rank histogram evaluation. As shown by examples in this paper, more powerful tests, suitable for small sample sizes, and very sensitive to the particular deficiencies that appear in rank histograms are available from the order-dependent Cramér–von Mises family of statistics, in particular, the Watson and Anderson–Darling statistics.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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