MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293302691 · doi:10.1080/00949655.2015.1106542

On-line monitoring data quality of high-dimensional data streams

2015· article· en· W2293302691 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dequan Qi, Zhonghua Li, Zhaojun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanadian Foundation for Dietetic Research
KeywordsUnivariateControl chartData stream miningData miningComputer scienceStatistical process controlMultivariate statisticsStatisticsData streamProcess (computing)MathematicsMachine learningTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, effective monitoring of data quality has increasingly attracted attention of researchers in the area of statistical process control. Among the relevant research on this topic, none used multivariate methods to control the multidimensional data quality process, but instead relied on multiple univariate control charts. Based on a novel one-sided multivariate exponentially weighted moving average (MEWMA) chart, we propose a conditional false discovery rate-adjusted scheme to on-line monitor the data quality of high-dimensional data streams. With thousands of input data streams, the average run length loses its usefulness because one will likely have out-of-control signals at each time period. Hence, we first control the percentage of signals that are false alarms. Then, we compare the power of the proposed MEWMA scheme with that of two alternative methods. Compared with two competitors, numerical results show that the proposed MEWMA scheme has higher average power.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.580
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.011 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistical Computation and SimulationSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207