MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133331977 · doi:10.31274/etd-180810-1709

A Small Area Procedure for Estimating Population Counts

2010· dissertation· en· W2133331977 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorContingency tableStatisticsSmall area estimationMathematicsEconometricsTable (database)Mean squared errorSample (material)Sample size determinationPopulationGeographyComputer scienceDemographyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many large scale surveys are designed to achieve acceptable reliability for large domains. Direct estimators for more detailed levels of aggregation are often judged to be unreliable due to small sample sizes. Estimation for small domains, often defined by geographic and demographic characteristics, is known as small area estimation. A common approach to small area estimation is to derive predictors under a specified mixed model for the direct estimators. A procedure of this type is developed for small areas defined by the cells of a two-way table.\nConstruction of small domain estimators using the Canadian Labour Force Survey (LFS) motivates the proposed model and estimation procedures. The LFS is designed to produce estimates of employment characteristics for certain pre-specified geographic and demographic domains. Direct estimators for specific occupations in small provinces are not published due to large estimated coefficients of variation. A preliminary study conducted in cooperation with Statistics Canada investigated estimation procedures for small areas defined by the cross-classification of occupations and provinces using data from a previous Census as auxiliary information. For consistency with published estimates, predictors are desired that preserve the direct estimators of the margins of the two-way table.\nOne method in the Statistics Canada study is based on a nonlinear mixed model for the direct estimators of the proportions. An initial predictor is defined to be a convex combination of the direct estimator and an estimator obtained by raking the Census totals to the direct estimators of the marginal totals. The estimators resulting from the raking operation are called the SPREE estimators and are expected to have smaller variances than the direct estimators. The weight assigned to the direct estimator depends on the relative magnitudes of an estimator of a random model component and an estimator of the sampling variance. The final predictors are defined by raking the initial predictors to the direct estimators of the marginal totals. Estimation of the mean squared error (MSE) of the predictors was not fully developed.\nThis dissertation addresses several issues raised by the procedure discussed above. First, the method above uses SPREE to estimate a fixed expected value. SPREE is unbiased if the Census interactions persist unchanged through time and is efficient if the direct estimators of the cell totals are realizations of independent Poisson random variables. A generalization of SPREE that is more efficient under a specified covariance structure is explored. A simulation study shows that predictors constructed under the specified covariance structure can have smaller MSE's than predictors calculated with the direct estimators of the variances. An estimator of the MSE of the initial convex combination of the direct estimator and the estimator of the fixed expected value is derived using Taylor linearizations. The LFS procedure uses a final raking operation to benchmark the predictors. A bootstrap procedure is investigated as a way to account for the effects of raking on the MSE's of the predictors. The procedures are applied to the Canadian Labour Force Survey, but the issues discussed are of general interest because they arise in many small area applications.

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)0.003
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.306 · 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