Model-Assisted Estimation Through Random Forests in Finite Population Sampling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In surveys, the interest lies in estimating finite population parameters such as population totals and means. In most surveys, some auxiliary information is available at the estimation stage. This information may be incorporated in the estimation procedures to increase their precision. In this article, we use random forests (RFs) to estimate the functional relationship between the survey variable and the auxiliary variables. In recent years, RFs have become attractive as National Statistical Offices have now access to a variety of data sources, potentially exhibiting a large number of observations on a large number of variables. We establish the theoretical properties of model-assisted procedures based on RFs and derive corresponding variance estimators. A model-calibration procedure for handling multiple survey variables is also discussed. The results of a simulation study suggest that the proposed point and estimation procedures perform well in terms of bias, efficiency and coverage of normal-based confidence intervals, in a wide variety of settings. Finally, we apply the proposed methods using data on radio audiences collected by Médiamétrie, a French audience company. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it