Multiple block sizes and overlapping blocks for multivariate time series extremes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Block maxima methods constitute a fundamental part of the statistical toolbox in extreme value analysis. However, most of the corresponding theory is derived under the simplifying assumption that block maxima are independent observations from a genuine extreme value distribution. In practice, however, block sizes are finite and observations from different blocks are dependent. Theory respecting the latter complications is not well developed, and, in the multivariate case, has only recently been established for disjoint blocks of a single block size. We show that using overlapping blocks instead of disjoint blocks leads to a uniform improvement in the asymptotic variance of the multivariate empirical distribution function of rescaled block maxima and any smooth functionals thereof (such as the empirical copula), without any sacrifice in the asymptotic bias. We further derive functional central limit theorems for multivariate empirical distribution functions and empirical copulas that are uniform in the block size parameter, which seems to be the first result of this kind for estimators based on block maxima in general. The theory allows for various aggregation schemes over multiple block sizes, leading to substantial improvements over the single block length case and opens the door to further methodology developments. In particular, we consider bias correction procedures that can improve the convergence rates of extreme-value estimators and shed some new light on estimation of the second-order parameter when the main purpose is bias correction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".