MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270377351 · doi:10.1017/s0266466608090075

COMPUTATIONALLY EFFICIENT RECURSIONS FOR TOP-ORDER INVARIANT POLYNOMIALS WITH APPLICATIONS

2009· article· en· W2270377351 on OpenAlexaff
Grant Hillier, Raymond Kan, Xiaolu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometric Theory · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsInvariant (physics)Order (exchange)Multivariate statisticsQuadratic equationEconometric modelMathematical economicsApplied mathematicsEconometricsStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The top-order zonal polynomials Ck(A), and top-order invariant polynomials Ck1,…,kr (A1, …, Ar) in which each of the partitions of ki, i = 1, …, r, has only one part, occur frequently in multivariate distribution theory, and econometrics — see, for example, Phillips (1980, Econometrica 48, 861–878; 1984, Journal of Econometrics 26, 387–398; 1985, International Economic Review 26, 21–36; 1986, Econometrica 54, 881–896), Hillier (1985, Econometric Theory 1, 53–72; 2001, Econometric Theory 17, 1–28), Hillier and Satchell (1986, Econometric Theory 2, 66–74), and Smith (1989, Journal of Multivariate Analysis 31, 244–257; 1993, Australian Journal of Statistics 35, 271–282). However, even with the recursive algorithms of Ruben (1962, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33, 542–570) and Chikuse (1987, Econometric Theory 3, 195–207), numerical evaluation of these invariant polynomials is extremely time consuming. As a result, the value of invariant polynomials has been largely confined to analytic work on distribution theory. In this paper we present new, very much more efficient, algorithms for computing both the top-order zonal and invariant polynomials. These results should make the theoretical results involving these functions much more valuable for direct practical study. We demonstrate the value of our results by providing fast and accurate algorithms for computing the moments of a ratio of quadratic forms in normal random variables.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconometric TheorySame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207