MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125462300 · doi:10.1002/cjs.10035

Two sample inference in functional linear models

2009· article· en· W2125462300 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Lajos Horváth, Piotr Kokoszka, Matthew Reimherr

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsFunctional data analysisScalar (mathematics)CovarianceNull hypothesisInferenceStatistical inferenceStatistical hypothesis testingApplied mathematicsNull distributionDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)StatisticsTest statisticComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a method of comparing two functional linear models in which explanatory variables are functions (curves) and responses can be either scalars or functions. In such models, the role of parameter vectors (or matrices) is played by integral operators acting on a function space. We test the null hypothesis that these operators are the same in two independent samples. The complexity of the test statistics increases as we move from scalar to functional responses and relax assumptions on the covariance structure of the regressors. They all, however, have an asymptotic chi‐squared distribution with the number of degrees of freedom which depends on a specific setting. The test statistics are readily computable using the R package fda , and have good finite sample properties. The test is applied to egg‐laying curves of Mediterranean flies and to data from terrestrial magnetic observatories. The Canadian Journal of Statistics © 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207