A Weighted Multivariate Sign Test for Cluster Correlated Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the multivariate location problem with cluster-correlated data. A family of multivariate weighted sign tests is introduced for which observations from different clusters can receive different weights. Under weak assumptions, the test statistic is asymptotically distributed as a chi-squared random variable as the number of clusters goes to infinity. The asymptotic distribution of the test statistic is also given for a local alternative model under multivariate normality. Optimal weights maximizing Pitman asymptotic efficiency are provided. These weights depend on the cluster sizes and on the intracluster correlation. Several approaches for estimating these weights are presented. Using Pitman asymptotic efficiency, we show that appropriate weighting can increase substantially the efficiency compared to a test that gives the same weight to each cluster. A multivariate weighted t-test is also introduced. The finite-sample performance of the weighted sign test is explored through a simulation study which shows that the proposed approach is very competitive. A real data example illustrates the practical application of the methodology.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".