MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305653947 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11282

Consistent two‐stage multiple change‐point detection in linear models

2016· article· en· W2305653947 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)Consistency (knowledge bases)Selection (genetic algorithm)Refining (metallurgy)Point (geometry)Change detectionComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsAlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A two‐stage procedure for simultaneously detecting multiple change‐points in linear models is developed. In the cutting stage, the change‐point problem is converted into a model selection problem so that a modern model selection method can be applied. In the refining stage, the change‐points obtained in the cutting stage are finalized via a refining method. Under mild conditions, consistency of the number of change‐point estimates is established. The new procedure is fast and accurate, as shown in simulation studies. Its applicability in real situations is demonstrated via well‐log and ozone data. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 44: 161–179; 2016 © 2016 Statistical Society of Canada

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.147 · 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