MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513257670 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11301

Survey estimation of domain means that respect natural orderings

2016· article· en· W2513257670 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jiwen Wu, Mary C. Meyer, Jean D. Opsomer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEstimatorEstimationMathematicsBootstrapping (finance)Domain (mathematical analysis)StatisticsPoolingEconometricsComputer scienceEconomicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many variables in surveys follow natural orderings that should be respected in estimates of domain means. For instance the U.S. National Compensation Survey estimates mean wages for many job categories, and these mean wages are expected to be non‐decreasing according to job level. In this type of situation isotonic regression can be applied to give constrained estimators satisfying the monotonicity. We combine domain estimation and the pooled adjacent violators algorithm to construct new design‐weighted constrained estimators. The resulting estimator is the classical design‐based domain estimator but after adaptive pooling of neighbouring domains, so that it is both readily implemented in large‐scale surveys and easy to explain to data users. Under mild conditions on the sampling design and the population we obtain the asymptotic properties of the estimator. Simulation results also demonstrate improved point estimators and confidence intervals for domain means using linearization‐ and replication‐based variance estimation compared to survey estimators that do not incorporate the constraints. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 44: 431–444; 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.004
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 score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207