MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951493603 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11510

Global kernel estimator and test of varying‐coefficient autoregressive model

2019· article· en· W2951493603 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Huazhen Lin, Baoying Yang, Ling Zhou, Paul Yip, Ying‐Yeh Chen, Hua Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoregressive modelMathematicsEstimatorAsymptotic distributionStatisticsConsistency (knowledge bases)EconometricsLikelihood-ratio testStatistical inferenceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a varying‐coefficient autoregressive model that contains additive models, varying‐ coefficient models, partially linear models and low‐dimensional interaction models as special cases. A global kernel backfitting method is proposed for the estimation and inference of parameters and unknown functions in this model. Key large‐sample results are established, including estimation consistency, asymptotic normality and the generalized likelihood ratio test for parameters and non‐parametric functions. The proposed methodology is examined by simulation studies and applied to examine the relationship between suicide news reports in the three leading newspapers and the daily number of suicides in Taiwan. The relationship between the media reporting and suicide incidence has been established and explored.The Canadian Journal of Statistics47: 487–519; 2019 © 2019 Statistical Society of 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.

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)0.103
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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