MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951067337 · doi:10.5705/ss.2011.261

Jackknife Empirical Likelihood Test for Equality of Two High Dimensional Means

2013· article· en· W2951067337 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistica Sinica · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJackknife resamplingMathematicsCovarianceDimension (graph theory)StatisticsSample size determinationEmpirical likelihoodEconometricsMultivariate statisticsResamplingSample (material)Test (biology)Confidence intervalEstimatorCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a long history of testing the equality of two multivariate means. A popular test is the Hotelling T 2 , but in large dimensions it performs poorly due to the possible inconsistency of sample covariance estimation. Bai and Saranadasa (1996) and Chen and Qin (2010) proposed tests not involving the sample covari- ance, and derived asymptotic limits, which depend on whether the dimension is fixed or diverges, under a specific multivariate model. In this paper, we propose a jackknife empirical likelihood test that has a chi-square limit independent of the dimension. The conditions are much weaker than those needed in existing methods. A simulation study shows that the proposed new test has a very robust size across dimensions and has good power.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.025
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.301 · 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