MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187434310 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11266

Edgeworth expansions for two‐stage sampling with applications to stratified and cluster sampling

2015· article· en· W2187434310 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsCluster samplingStratified samplingStatisticsStudentized rangeSampling (signal processing)Sampling designMultistage samplingMathematicsTerm (time)Sample (material)Confidence intervalPopulationCluster (spacecraft)Sample size determinationEconometricsDemographyStandard errorComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A two‐term Edgeworth expansion for the standardized version of the sample total in a two‐stage sampling design is derived. In particular, for the commonly used stratified and cluster sampling schemes, formal two‐term asymptotic expansions are obtained for the Studentized versions of the sample total. These results are applied in conjunction with the bootstrap to construct more accurate confidence intervals for the unknown population total in such sampling schemes. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 43: 578–599; 2015 © 2015 The Authors. The Canadian Journal of Statistics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.161 · 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