MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009445160 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11541

Robust multivariate change point analysis based on data depth

2020· article· en· W3009445160 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Shojaeddin Chenouri, Ahmad Mozaffari, Gregory Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSkewnessTest statisticNonparametric statisticsStatisticsMultivariate statisticsMathematicsCovarianceStatistical hypothesis testingSample size determinationMonte Carlo methodNull hypothesisStatisticEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Modern methods for detecting changes in the scale or covariance of multivariate distributions rely primarily on testing for the constancy of the covariance matrix. These depend on higher‐order moment conditions, and also do not work well when the dimension of the data is large or even moderate relative to the sample size. In this paper, we propose a nonparametric change point test for multivariate data using rankings obtained from data depth measures. As the data depth of an observation measures its centrality relative to the sample, changes in data depth may signify a change of scale of the underlying distribution, and the proposed test is particularly responsive to detecting such changes. We provide a full asymptotic theory for the proposed test statistic under the null hypothesis that the observations are stable, and natural conditions under which the test is consistent. The finite sample properties are investigated by means of a Monte Carlo simulation, and these along with the theoretical results confirm that the test is robust to heavy tails, skewness and high dimensionality. The proposed methods are demonstrated with an application to structural break detection in the rate of change of pollutants linked to acid rain measured in Turkey lake, a lake in central Ontario, Canada. Our test suggests a change in the rate of acid rain in the late 1980s/early 1990s, which coincides with clean air legislation in Canada and the US.The Canadian Journal of Statistics48: 417–446; 2020 © 2020 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.469
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.060 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207