MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901881505

Confidence Interval Estimation for the Ratio of Binomial Proportions and Random Numbers Generation for Some Statistical Models

2018· dissertation· en· W2901881505 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueoURspace (University of Regina) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Regina
KeywordsStatisticsBinomial proportion confidence intervalBinomial (polynomial)Confidence intervalInterval estimationMathematicsEstimationBinomial distributionNegative binomial distributionTolerance intervalInterval (graph theory)EconometricsPoisson distributionEngineeringCombinatorics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A general problem of the interval estimation for a ratio of two proportions p1=p2 according to data from two independent samples is considered. Each sample may be obtained in the framework of direct or inverse binomial sampling. Asymptotic confidence intervals are constructed in accordance with different types of sampling schemes with an application, where it is possible, of unbiased estimations of success probabilities and also their logarithms. Since methods of constructing confidence intervals in the situations when values for the both samples are obtained for identical sample schemes are already developed and well known, the main purpose of this paper is the investigation of constructing confidence intervals in two cases that correspond to different sampling schemes. In this situation it is possible to plan the sample size for the second sample according to the number of successes in the first sample. This, as it is shown by the results of statistical modeling, provides the intervals with confidence level which closer to the nominal value. Next, we provide a new procedure to generate random number that follow three parameter Crack distribution. To generate Crack random number by composition method, first we generate random number from already known two parameter distributions: Inverse Gaussian distribution, and Length Biased Inverse Gaussian distribution. Finally, we derive Crack random number generation procedure. Note that for many years the temperature and its temporal and spatial dynamics have been one of the determinants of demographic processes. The use of temperature values measured at the centre of population could significantly increase the accuracy of birth vs. temperature correlation analysis. Within the reported studies we have determined the center of population of the province of Saskatchewan of Canada. Unavailability of western-laboratory-type data on water quality for the areas where the aboriginal people live requires developing special evaluation and prognosis-making methodologies. To determine the key parameters of the water quality we interviewed the experts (aboriginal elders). Basing on the determined key parameters we formed the key questions and developed the questionnaires. The questionnaires were distributed among the households of the Peepeekisis and Kahkewistahaw aboriginal communities (Saskatchewan, 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.266 · 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