MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003321657 · doi:10.1111/rssb.12358

Sumca: Simple, Unified, Monte-Carlo-assisted Approach to Second-Order Unbiased Mean-Squared Prediction Error Estimation

2020· article· en· W3003321657 on OpenAlexaff
Jiming Jiang, Mahmoud Torabi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodEstimatorMean squared errorJackknife resamplingBest linear unbiased predictionStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceBias of an estimatorAlgorithmMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorSelection (genetic algorithm)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We propose a simple, unified, Monte-Carlo-assisted approach (called ‘Sumca’) to second-order unbiased estimation of the mean-squared prediction error (MSPE) of a small area predictor. The MSPE estimator proposed is easy to derive, has a simple expression and applies to a broad range of predictors that include the traditional empirical best linear unbiased predictor, empirical best predictor and post-model-selection empirical best linear unbiased predictor and empirical best predictor as special cases. Furthermore, the leading term of the MSPE estimator proposed is guaranteed positive; the lower order term corresponds to a bias correction, which can be evaluated via a Monte Carlo method. The computational burden for the Monte Carlo evaluation is much less, compared with other Monte-Carlo-based methods that have been used for producing second-order unbiased MSPE estimators, such as the double bootstrap and Monte Carlo jackknife. The Sumca estimator also has a nice stability feature. Theoretical and empirical results demonstrate properties and advantages of the Sumca estimator.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology)Same topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207