MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343847883 · doi:10.1080/03610926.2014.897137

A note on a family of criteria for evaluating test statistics

2016· article· en· W2343847883 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon Anderson, Teng Wah Leo

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsDominance (genetics)Null hypothesisPower indexPopulationStatistical hypothesis testingEconometricsMathematical economicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In noting that the usual criteria for choosing an optimal test, Uniform Power and Local Power are at opposite ends of a spectrum of dominance criteria, a complete “Power Dominance” family of criteria for classifying and choosing optimal tests on the basis of their power characteristics is identified, wherein successive orders of dominance attach increasing weight to power close to the null hypothesis. Indices of the extent to which a preferred test has superior power characteristics over other members in its class, and an index of the proximity of a test to the envelope function of alternative tests are also provided. The ideas are exemplified using various optimal test statistics for Normal and Laplace population distributions.

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)0.091
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.326
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0910.326
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207