MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122883815

On the bias of the maximum likelihood estimator for the two-parameter Lomax distribution

2011· preprint· en· W3122883815 on OpenAlexaff
David E. A. Giles, Hui Feng, Ryan T. Godwin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLomax distributionEstimatorMathematicsStatisticsMean squared errorParametric statisticsPareto principlePareto distributionBias of an estimatorDistribution (mathematics)Monte Carlo methodApplied mathematicsMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorMathematical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lomax (Pareto II) distribution has found wide application in a variety of fields. We analyze the second-order bias of the maximum likelihood estimators of its parameters for finite sample sizes, and show that this bias is positive. We derive an analytic bias correction which reduces the percentage bias of these estimators by one or two orders of magnitude, while simultaneously reducing relative mean squared error. Our simulations show that this analytic bias correction outperforms a correction based on the parametric bootstrap. Three examples with actual data illustrate the application of our methods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207