MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186679808 · doi:10.1080/07474938.2017.1307918

Diagnostics for the bootstrap and fast double bootstrap

2017· article· en· W2186679808 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.

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

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Reviews · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBootstrapping (finance)Computer scienceSeries (stratigraphy)Context (archaeology)Bootstrap modelAutocorrelationBootstrap aggregatingEconometricsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bootstrap is typically less reliable in the context of time-series models with serial correlation of unknown form than when regularity conditions for the conventional IID bootstrap apply. It is, therefore, useful to have diagnostic techniques capable of evaluating bootstrap performance in specific cases. Those suggested in this paper are closely related to the fast double bootstrap (FDB) and are not computationally intensive. They can also be used to gauge the performance of the FDB itself. Examples of bootstrapping time series are presented, which illustrate the diagnostic procedures, and show how the results can cast light on bootstrap performance.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.075 · 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