MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042683922 · doi:10.1080/01621459.2022.2096619

Hypothesis Tests for Structured Rank Correlation Matrices

2022· article· en· W3042683922 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel Perreault, Johanna Nešlehová, Thierry Duchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Valorisation des Données
KeywordsRank (graph theory)Dimension (graph theory)Sample size determinationMathematicsStatistical hypothesis testingPartial correlationMatrix (chemical analysis)Sample (material)StatisticsCovariance matrixDesign matrixCorrelationComputer scienceAlgorithmLinear modelCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joint modeling of a large number of variables often requires dimension reduction strategies that lead to structural assumptions of the underlying correlation matrix, such as equal pair-wise correlations within subsets of variables. The underlying correlation matrix is thus of interest for both model specification and model validation. In this article, we develop tests of the hypothesis that the entries of the Kendall rank correlation matrix are linear combinations of a smaller number of parameters. The asymptotic behavior of the proposed test statistics is investigated both when the dimension is fixed and when it grows with the sample size. We pay special attention to the restricted hypothesis of partial exchangeability, which contains full exchangeability as a special case. We show that under partial exchangeability, the test statistics and their large-sample distributions simplify, which leads to computational advantages and better performance of the tests. We propose various scalable numerical strategies for implementation of the proposed procedures, investigate their behavior through simulations and power calculations under local alternatives, and demonstrate their use on a real dataset of mean sea levels at various geographical locations. 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.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.285
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.285
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Statistical AssociationSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207