An alternative Wald type test for two linear restrictions with applications to non-linear models
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 This paper proposes a new test procedure called the rel test to resolve the problem of small-sample local biasedness and non-monotonic power behavior of the Wald test for two linear restrictions caused by inaccuracy of the estimated covariance matrix of the estimator. This new test procedure, which does not need the covariance matrix of the estimator, involves finding the critical region based on contour points of the percentile confidence limit of a rel utilizing the bootstrap in order to obtain a test with the desired size and good power properties. Simulation results indicate that this new test procedure, the rel test, performs rather well both with respect to controlling size and having monotonic increasing power. Keywords: Bootstrap methodsConfidence regionsMaximum likelihoodSimulation methodsTest size MSC 2000 : Primary: 62F03Secondary: 62J02 Acknowledgements This paper was presented to the 2006 Statistical Society of Canada Meeting, held in London, Ontario. The authors thank the associate editor and the referee for their helpful comments and suggestions, which have improved the article.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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