MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950783511

Small Area Estimation Methodology (SAE) applied on Bogota Multipurpose Survey (EMB)

2018· article· en· W2950783511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jose F. Zea, Felipe Chibás Ortiz

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Production Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimationSmall area estimationStatisticsGeographyEngineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMathematicsSystems engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small Area Estimation Methodology (SAE) is a widely used by statistical offices in several countries to reduce sampling errors with the help of auxiliary information. Different countries such as USA, Canada, England, Israel and European Community have within their statistical institutes offices dedicated to the application of SAE in several investigations. So far, the National Administrative Department of Statistics of Colombia (DANE), has not published official statistics that involve this methodology. The present work illustrates the advantages in the use and estimation of living conditions using SAE. Formally, the unemployment rate and the average income levels of municipalities of Cundinamarca are estimated. For this purpose, information of the Multipurpose Survey 2014 is used and is complemented with socio-demographic and economic related auxiliary information. A mixed Fay & Herriot (1979) model it is used in order to get the estimates. We use R ecosystem to develop SAE methodology. R is used for data wrangling, model adjustment, parameter estimation and finally visualization with the aid of renowned packages such as tidyr, forcats, sae, ggplot2 among others. We will show R implementation and some remarkable results. First, a good adjustment of the model to the data; second, a reduction in the sampling errors reported by the estimation in small areas compared to the direct estimates generated by the Bogota Multipurpose Survey (EMB); and finally acceptable estimates for municipalities that were not covered by the survey.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.113 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicAgricultural and Food Production StudiesFrench-language works237,207