Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is concerned with tests of restrictions on the sample path of conditional quantile processes. These tests are tantamount to assessments of lack of fit for models of conditional quantile functions or more generally as tests of how certain covariates affect the distribution of an outcome variable of interest. This paper extends tests of the generalized likelihood ratio (GLR) type as introduced by Fan, Zhang and Zhang (2001) to nonparametric inference problems regarding conditional quantile processes. As such, the tests proposed here present viable alternatives to existing methods based on the Khmaladze (1981, 1988) martingale transformation. The range of inference problems that may be addressed by the methods proposed here is wide, and includes tests of nonparametric nulls against nonparametric alternatives as well as tests of parametric specifications against nonparametric alternatives. In particular, it is shown that a class of GLR statistics based on nonparametric additive quantile regressions have pivotal asymptotic distributions given by the suprema of squares of Bessel processes, as in Hawkins (1987) and Andrews (1993). The tests proposed here are also shown to be asymptotically rate-optimal for nonparametric hypothesis testing according to the formulations of Ingster (1993) and of Spokoiny (1996).
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 | 0.019 | 0.161 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".