MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041871434 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11558

Copula‐based predictions in small area estimation

2020· article· en· W3041871434 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kanika Grover, Elif F. Acar, Mahmoud Torabi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsManitoba HealthUniversity of ManitobaHospital for Sick ChildrenStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmall area estimationCopula (linguistics)EstimatorBest linear unbiased predictionEconometricsStatisticsParametric statisticsMultivariate statisticsMean squared errorUnbiased EstimationMathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Unit‐level regression models are commonly used in small area estimation (SAE) to obtain an empirical best linear unbiased prediction of small area characteristics. The underlying assumptions of these models, however, may be unrealistic in some applications. Previous work developed a copula‐based SAE model where the empirical Kendall's tau was used to estimate the dependence between two units from the same area. In this article, we propose a likelihood framework to estimate the intra‐class dependence of the multivariate exchangeable copula for the empirical best unbiased prediction (EBUP) of small area means. One appeal of the proposed approach lies in its accommodation of both parametric and semi‐parametric estimation approaches. Under each estimation method, we further propose a bootstrap approach to obtain a nearly unbiased estimator of the mean squared prediction error of the EBUP of small area means. The performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through simulation studies and also by a real data application.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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