MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339185861

On Testing for Serial Correlation of Unknown Form Using Wavelet Thresholding

2009· article· en· W2339185861 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Duchesne, Linyuan Li, Jill Vandermeerschen

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletMathematicsEstimatorCascade algorithmMonte Carlo methodStatisticsSpectral densityThresholdingWhite noiseAlgorithmWavelet transformDiscrete wavelet transformArtificial intelligenceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Omnibus procedures for testing serial correlation are developed, using spectral density estimation and wavelet shrinkage. The asymptotic distributions of the wavelet coefficients under the null hypothesis of no serial correlation are derived. Under some general conditions on the wavelet basis, the wavelet coefficients asymptotically follow a normal distribution. Furthermore, they are asymptotically uncorrelated. Adopting a spectral approach and using results on wavelet shrinkage, new one-sided test statistics are proposed. As a spatially adaptive estimation method, wavelets can effectively detect fine features in the spectral density, such as sharp peaks and high frequency alternations. Using an appropriate thresholding parameter, shrinkage rules are applied to the empirical wavelet coefficients, resulting in a non-linear wavelet-based spectral density estimator. Consequently, the advocated approach avoids the need to select the finest scale J, since the noise in the wavelet coefficients is naturally suppressed. Simple data-dependent threshold parameters are also considered. In general, the convergence of the spectral test statistics toward their respective asymptotic distributions appears to be relatively slow. In view of that, Monte Carlo methods are investigated. In a small simulation study, several spectral test statistics are compared, with respect to level and power, including versions of these test statistics using Monte Carlo simulations.

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)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.272
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.272
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207