POWER COMPARISON OF SOME TESTS FOR DETECTING A CHANGE IN THE MULTIVARIATE MEAN
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
Using Monte Carlo methods, we compare the power of three tests based on each of N ≥ 2 p-dimensional random vectors x 1,…,x N to decide if the means μi of the x i's are all equal against the alternative that a change has occurred at some point r (i.e., μ1 = μ2 = ··· = μ r ≠ μ r+1 = μ N ). The vectors x i are assumed to have multivariate normal distributions with common unknown covariance matrix Σ. Two of these tests, a likelihood ratio test and a generalization of Bayes test have been proposed by Srivastava and the third test is a generalization of a test proposed by Sen and Srivastava. It is found that for detecting moderate to large shifts, the test based on the LR statistics performs best when the change occurs near the beginning or the end, while the generalization of Sen and Srivastava's test performs best when the change occurs near the middle. A third test, a multivariate generalization of a univariate Bayes test is slightly inferior. However, for detecting small shifts, or for large sample sizes (N≥60) and moderate p, all three tests perform similarly in the cases we considered. The sequential stopping rule along with pinching-algorithm of Dunn are used to provide tables of simulated percentiles.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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