Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an attempt to free bootstrap theory from the shackles of asymptotic considerations, this paper studies the possibility of justifying, or validating, the bootstrap, not by letting the sample size tend to infinity, but by considering the sequence of bootstrap P values obtained by iterating the bootstrap. The main idea of the paper is that, if this sequence converges to a random variable that follows the uniform U(0; 1) distribution, then the bootstrap is valid. The idea is studied by making the model under test discrete and finite, so that it is characterised by a finite three-dimensional array of probabilities. This device, when available, renders bootstrap iteration to any desired order feasible. It is used for studying a unit-root test for a process driven by a stationary MA(1) process, where it is known that the unit-root test, even when bootstrapped, becomes quite unreliable when the MA(1) parameter is in the vicinity of -1. Iteration of the bootstrap P value to convergence achieves reliable inference except for a parameter value very close to -1. The paper then endeavours to see these specific results in a wider context, and tries to cast new light on where bootstrap theory may be going.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".