MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adjusted Jackknife for Imputation under Unequal Probability Sampling Without Replacement

2006· article· en· W2164422502 on OpenAlexafffund
Yves G. Berger, J. N. K. Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Southampton
KeywordsJackknife resamplingImputation (statistics)StatisticsEstimatorVariance (accounting)MathematicsSimple random sampleMissing dataEconometricsProbability samplingSampling (signal processing)Sample size determinationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Imputation is commonly used to compensate for item non-response in sample surveys. If we treat the imputed values as if they are true values, and then compute the variance estimates by using standard methods, such as the jackknife, we can seriously underestimate the true variances. We propose a modified jackknife variance estimator which is defined for any without-replacement unequal probability sampling design in the presence of imputation and non-negligible sampling fraction. Mean, ratio and random-imputation methods will be considered. The practical advantage of the method proposed is its breadth of applicability.

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.219
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.219
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology)Same topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207