MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123210782 · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.273514

Improving the Reliability of Bootstrap Tests with the Fast Double Bootstrap

2006· preprint· en· W3123210782 on OpenAlexafffund
Russell Davidson, James G. MacKinnon

Bibliographic record

VenueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsReplication (statistics)Monte Carlo methodReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceStatistical hypothesis testingAlgorithmStatisticsReliability engineeringMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We first propose two procedures for estimating the rejection probabilities of bootstrap tests in Monte Carlo experiments without actually computing a bootstrap test for each replication. These procedures are only about twice as expensive (per replication) as estimating rejection probabilities for asymptotic tests. We then propose a new procedure for computing bootstrap P values that will often be more accurate than ordinary ones. This “fast double bootstrap” is closely related to the double bootstrap, but it is far less computationally demanding. Simulation results for three different cases suggest that this procedure can be very useful in practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.364
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.364
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)Same topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207