MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810522816 · doi:10.1111/sjos.12394

Bootstrapping mean‐squared errors of robust small‐area estimators: Application to the method‐of‐payments surveys data

2019· article· en· W2810522816 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Statistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsCanada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorBootstrapping (finance)Small area estimationEconometricsMean squared errorMathematicsStatisticsCashMonte Carlo methodSample (material)PaymentTruncated meanEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper proposes a new bootstrap procedure for mean‐squared errors of robust small‐area estimators. We formally prove the asymptotic validity of the proposed bootstrap method and examine its finite‐sample performance through Monte Carlo simulations. The results show that our procedure performs well and competes with existing ones. We also provide an application to the estimation of the total volume and value of cash, debit card, and credit card transactions in Canada as well as in its provinces and subgroups of households. In particular, we found that there is a significant average annual decline rate of 3.1% in the volume of cash transactions and that this decline is relatively higher among high‐income households living in heavily populated provinces. Our bootstrap estimator also provides indicators of quality useful in selecting the best small‐area predictor among several alternatives in practice.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.187 · 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