MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123166771 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.273632

Empirical Likelihood Block Bootstrapping

2008· preprint· en· W3123166771 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason Allen, Allan W. Gregory, Katsumi Shimotsu

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2008
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityBank of Canada
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsBootstrapping (finance)Moment (physics)Monte Carlo methodMathematicsResamplingMultinomial distributionInferenceEmpirical likelihoodApplied mathematicsEdgeworth seriesAsymptotic analysisStatisticsSeries (stratigraphy)EconometricsEstimatorComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo evidence has made it clear that asymptotic tests based on generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation have disappointing size. The problem is exacerbated when the moment conditions are serially correlated. Several block bootstrap techniques have been proposed to correct the problem, including Hall and Horowitz (1996) and Inoue and Shintani (2006). We propose an empirical likelihood block bootstrap procedure to improve inference where models are characterized by nonlinear moment conditions that are serially correlated of possibly infinite order. Combining the ideas of Kitamura (1997) and Brown and Newey (2002), the parameters of a model are initially estimated by GMM which are then used to compute the empirical likelihood probability weights of the blocks of moment conditions. The probability weights serve as the multinomial distribution used in resampling. The first-order asymptotic validity of the proposed procedure is proven, and a series of Monte Carlo experiments show it may improve test sizes over conventional block bootstrapping.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207