MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194960242 · doi:10.1111/biom.12429

False Discovery Rate Estimation for Large-Scale Homogeneous Discrete<i>p</i>-Values

2015· article· en· W2194960242 on OpenAlexafffund
Kun Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHomogeneousFalse discovery rateEstimationScale (ratio)StatisticsMathematicsEconometricsBiologyEconomicsCombinatoricsGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale homogeneous discrete p-values are encountered frequently in high-throughput genomics studies, and the related multiple testing problems become challenging because most existing methods for the false discovery rate (FDR) assume continuous p-values. In this article, we study the estimation of the null proportion and FDR for discrete p-values with common support. In the finite sample setting, we propose a novel class of conservative FDR estimators. Furthermore, we show that a broad class of FDR estimators is simultaneously conservative over all support points under some weak dependence condition in the asymptotic setting. We further demonstrate the significant improvement of a newly proposed method over existing methods through simulation studies and a case study.

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)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.192
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.192
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.476
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.062 · 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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207