MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215800506 · doi:10.13052/jrss0974-8024.14210

Estimation of Finite Population Variance Under Stratified Sampling Technique

2021· article· en· W3215800506 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reliability and Statistical Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorStratified samplingStatisticsSampling (signal processing)PopulationMathematicsPopulation varianceSampling designSimple random sampleVariance (accounting)Mean squared errorSample (material)Sample size determinationSurvey samplingCluster samplingRatio estimatorEconometricsBias of an estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorComputer scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficiency of the study variable can be improved by incorporating the information from the known auxiliary variables. Usually two techniques ratio and regression estimation are used with the help of auxiliary information in different approaches to acquire the high precision of the estimators. Considering the very heterogeneous population to get the size of the sample it may be originating impossible to get a sufficiently accurate and precise estimate by taking the simple random sampling technique from the complete population. Occasionally taking sample issue may differ significantly in different part of the entire population. For example, under study population consists of people living in apartments, own homes, hospitals and prisons or people living in plain regions and hill regions so in such situations the stratified sampling is one of the most commonly used approach to get a representative sample in survey sampling from different cross units of the population. The present study is set out on the recommendation of generalized variance estimators for finite population variance incorporating stratified sampling scheme with the information of single and two transformed auxiliary variables. The expressions of bias and mean square error (MSE) are obtained for the advised exponential type estimators. The conditions are obtained for which the anticipated estimators are better than the usual estimator. An empirical and simulation study is conducted to prove the superiority of the recommended estimator.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.270 · 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