MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

WILCOXON‐TYPE RANK‐SUM PRECEDENCE TESTS

2004· article· en· W2144239591 on OpenAlexaff
Hon Keung Tony Ng, N. Balakrishnan

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWilcoxon signed-rank testMathematicsRank (graph theory)StatisticsNull hypothesisNull (SQL)Monte Carlo methodStatistical hypothesis testingCombinatoricsMann–Whitney U testComputer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper introduces Wilcoxon‐type rank‐sum precedence tests for testing the hypothesis that two life‐time distribution functions are equal. They extend the precedence life‐test first proposed by Nelson in 1963. The paper proposes three Wilcoxon‐type rank‐sum precedence test statistics—the minimal, maximal and expected rank‐sum statistics—and derives their null distributions. Critical values are presented for some combinations of sample sizes, and the exact power function is derived under the Lehmann alternative. The paper examines the power properties of the Wilcoxon‐type rank‐sum precedence tests under a location‐shift alternative through Monte Carlo simulations, and it compares the power of the precedence test, the maximal precedence test and Wilcoxon rank‐sum test (based on complete samples). Two examples are presented for illustration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207