Phase I monitoring with nonparametric mixed‐effect models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In many real‐life applications, the quality of products from a process is monitored by a functional relationship between a response variable and one or more explanatory variables. In these applications, methodologies of profile monitoring are used to check the stability of this relationship over time. In phase I of profile monitoring, historical data points that can be represented by curves (or profiles) are collected. In this article, 2 procedures are proposed for detecting outlying profiles in phase I data, by incorporating the local linear kernel smoothing within the framework of nonparametric mixed‐effect models. We introduce a stepwise algorithm on the basis of the multiple testing viewpoint. Our simulation results for various linear and nonlinear profiles display the superior efficiency of our proposed monitoring procedures over some existing techniques in the literature. To illustrate the implementation of the proposed methods in phase I profile monitoring, we apply the methods on a vertical density profile dataset.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it