MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124975242 · doi:10.1080/10629360600831711

Finite sample penalization in adaptive density deconvolution

2007· article· en· W2124975242 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsDeconvolutionEstimatorIndependent and identically distributed random variablesKernel density estimationRobustness (evolution)Adaptive estimatorDensity estimationStatisticsDependency (UML)Applied mathematicsKernel (algebra)AlgorithmRandom variableCombinatoricsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of estimating the density g of identically distributed variables X i , from a sample Z 1, …, Z n , where Z i =X i +σϵ i , i=1, …, n and σϵ i is a noise independent of X i with known density σ−1 f ϵ(·/σ). We numerically study the adaptive estimators, constructed by a model selection procedure described by Comte et al. [2006, Penalized contrast estimator for density deconvolution, Canadian Journal of Statistics, 37(3)]. We illustrate their properties in various contexts and test their robustness (misspecification of errors, dependency and so on). Comparisons are made with respect to deconvolution kernel estimators. It appears that our estimation algorithm, based on a fast procedure, performs very well in all contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.307 · 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