MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130717440

On AR(1) versus MA(1) models for non-stationary time series of Poisson counts: part II (application)

2005· article· en· W2130717440 on OpenAlex
Vandna Jowaheer, Brajendra C. Sutradhar

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCount dataPoisson distributionSeries (stratigraphy)Goodness of fitStatisticsPoisson regressionMathematicsData setTime seriesEconometricsDemographyPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Observations driven non-stationary Poisson AR(1) and MA(1) models may be applied to analyze various biomedical and socio-economic (e.g., monthly tourist counts) time series of counts. This paper fits such AR(1) and MA(1) models to the US monthly polio count data which was analyzed earlier by Zeger [7] and Davis, Dunsmuir and Wang [1] by using a random effects based correlated count response model. The goodness of fitting of the AR(1) and MA(1) models to this polio data set is also discussed. Key–Words: Efficient generalized quasilikelihood (GQL) approach; MA(1) models for counts; Polio count data analysis. 1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.300 · 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