MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126797434 · doi:10.1007/s11749-014-0365-7

On complete convergence for widely orthant-dependent random variables and its applications in nonparametric regression models

2014· article· en· W2126797434 on OpenAlexaff
Xuejun Wang, Chen Xu, Tien-Chung Hu, Andrei Volodin, Shuhe Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueTest · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthantMathematicsEstimatorConvergence of random variablesRandom variableNonparametric regressionConvergence (economics)Strong consistencyMoment (physics)Nonparametric statisticsConsistency (knowledge bases)Multivariate random variableStatisticsProofs of convergence of random variablesApplied mathematicsSum of normally distributed random variablesDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.091
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.296
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0910.296
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.007
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.020
Scholarly communication0.0050.016
Open science0.0080.015
Research integrity0.0080.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations154
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTestSame topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207