MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805040766 · doi:10.2991/jsta.2018.17.1.12

Divergence Measures Estimation and Its Asymptotic Normality Theory Using Wavelets Empirical Processes I

2018· article· en· W2805040766 on OpenAlexaff
Amadou Diadié Ba, Gane Samb Lô, Diam Bâ

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Theory and Applications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsBP (Canada)
FundersCentre d'Excellence africain en Mathématiques, Informatique et TICWorld Bank Group
KeywordsMathematicsAsymptotic distributionEconometricsDivergence (linguistics)Local asymptotic normalityStatisticsEstimationWaveletAsymptotic analysisApplied mathematicsNormalityEstimatorEconomicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We deal with the normality asymptotic theory of empirical divergences measures based on wavelets in a series of three papers.In this first paper, we provide the asymptotic theory of the general of φ -divergences measures, which includes the most common divergence measures : Renyi and Tsallis families and the Kullback-Leibler measures.Instead of using the Parzen nonparametric estimators of the probability density functions whose discrepancy is estimated, we use the wavelets approach and the geometry of Besov spaces.One-sided and two-sided statistical tests are derived.This paper is devoted to the foundations the general asymptotic theory and the exposition of the mains theoretical tools concerning the φ -forms, while proofs and next detailed and applied results will be given in the two subsequent papers which deal important key divergence measures and symmetrized estimators.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Statistical Theory and ApplicationsSame topicStatistical and numerical algorithmsFrench-language works237,207