MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938215358 · doi:10.1214/19-ejs1548

Improved inference in generalized mean-reverting processes with multiple change-points

2019· article· en· W2938215358 on OpenAlexaff
Sévérien Nkurunziza, Kang Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Statistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsInferenceMean reversionApplied mathematicsStatisticsEconometricsCalculus (dental)Artificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider inference problem about the drift parameter vector in generalized mean reverting processes with multiple and unknown change-points. In particular, we study the case where the parameter may satisfy uncertain restriction. As compared to the results in literature, we generalize some findings in five ways. First, we consider the model which incorporates the uncertain prior knowledge. Second, we derive the unrestricted estimator (UE) and the restricted estimator (RE) and we study their asymptotic properties. Third, we derive a test for testing the hypothesized restriction and we derive its asymptotic local power. We also prove that the proposed test is consistent. Fourth, we construct a class of shrinkage type estimators (SEs) which encloses the UE, the RE and classical SEs. Fifth, we derive the relative risk dominance of the proposed estimators. More precisely, we prove that the SEs dominate the UE. Finally, we present some simulation results which corroborate the established theoretical findings.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207