Variance estimation for mean growth from successive double sampling for stratification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Double sampling for stratification (2SS) is a sampling design that is widely used for forest inventories. We present the mathematical derivation of two appropriate variance estimators for mean growth from repeated 2SS with updated stratification on each measurement occasion. Both estimators account for substratification based on the transition of sampling units among the strata due to the updated allocation. For the first estimator, sizes of the substrata were estimated from the second-phase sample (sample plots), whereas the respective sizes in the second variance estimator relied on the larger first-phase sample. The estimators were empirically compared with a modified version of Cochran’s well-known 2SS variance estimator that ignores substratification. This was done by performing bootstrap resampling on data from two German forest districts. The major findings were as follows: (i) accounting for substratification, as implemented in both new estimators, has substantial impact in terms of significantly smaller variance estimates and bias compared with the estimator without substratification, and (ii) the second estimator with substrata sizes being estimated from the first-phase sample shows a smaller bias than the first estimator.
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 | 0.018 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".