MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171734829 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11621

Semiparametric integer‐valued autoregressive models on ℤ

2021· article· en· W3171734829 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhengwei Liu, Qi Li, Fukang Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoregressive modelEstimatorSTAR modelNonparametric statisticsSemiparametric modelParametric statisticsInteger (computer science)Series (stratigraphy)Parametric modelMathematicsEconometricsSign (mathematics)Semiparametric regressionInterval (graph theory)Time seriesComputer scienceStatisticsAutoregressive integrated moving average

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the analysis of real integer‐valued time series data, we often encounter negative values and negative correlations. For integer‐valued autoregressive time series, there are many parametric models to choose from, but some of them are relatively complex. With little information about the background of real data, we hope that a simple and effective semiparametric model can be used to obtain more information that usually cannot be provided by parametric models, such as the confidence interval of the innovation distribution. But the only existing semiparametric model based on thinning operators can only deal with non‐negative data with positive correlation coefficients. In addition, it has two drawbacks: first, an initial distribution of the innovation is required, but different initial values may lead to different results; second, the confidence interval of the innovation distribution is not available, which is essential in low‐valued data. To overcome these drawbacks, we propose a rounded semiparametric autoregressive model with a log‐concave innovation, which can deal with ‐valued time series with autoregressive coefficients of arbitrary sign. The consistencies of the estimators for the parametric and nonparametric parts of the model are also discussed. We illustrate the superior performance of the proposed model based on three real datasets.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207