A Study of Seven Asymmetric Kernels for the Estimation of Cumulative Distribution Functions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we complement a study recently conducted in a paper of H.A. Mombeni, B. Masouri and M.R. Akhoond by introducing five new asymmetric kernel c.d.f. estimators on the half-line [0,∞), namely the Gamma, inverse Gamma, LogNormal, inverse Gaussian and reciprocal inverse Gaussian kernel c.d.f. estimators. For these five new estimators, we prove the asymptotic normality and we find asymptotic expressions for the following quantities: bias, variance, mean squared error and mean integrated squared error. A numerical study then compares the performance of the five new c.d.f. estimators against traditional methods and the Birnbaum–Saunders and Weibull kernel c.d.f. estimators from Mombeni, Masouri and Akhoond. By using the same experimental design, we show that the LogNormal and Birnbaum–Saunders kernel c.d.f. estimators perform the best overall, while the other asymmetric kernel estimators are sometimes better but always at least competitive against the boundary kernel method from C. Tenreiro.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it