Bootstrap methods for imputed data from regression, ratio and hot‐deck imputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Item non‐response in sample surveys is usually addressed by imputation. A bootstrap method that treats the imputed values as if they were observed generally leads to variance estimates that are too small. Shao & Sitter (1996) introduced a bootstrap method in this context, which leads to consistent variance estimators when the sampling fraction is small. In the context of stratified simple random sampling, we introduce the independent bootstrap, which is valid even when the sampling fraction is large. It consists of modifying a bootstrap method for sample surveys, of independently generating the response status of each unit, and of imputing the non‐respondents in the bootstrap sample. We pay special attention to the bootstrap survey weights approach of Rao, Wu, & Yue (1992). The Canadian Journal of Statistics 42: 142–167; 2014 © 2014 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.043 | 0.215 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".