MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221010252 · doi:10.1007/s11203-022-09273-9

A functional central limit theorem on non-stationary random fields with nested spatial structure

2022· article· en· W4221010252 on OpenAlexafffund
Leshun Xu, Alan Lee, Thomas Lumley

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Inference for Stochastic Processes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMarsden FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsCentral limit theoremQuantileLimit (mathematics)Mixing (physics)Random fieldContext (archaeology)GeneralizationStatistical physicsGaussian random fieldGaussian processGaussianMathematical analysisApplied mathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we establish a functional central limit theorem on high dimensional random fields in the context of model-based survey analysis. For strongly-mixing non-stationary random fields, we provide an upper bound for the fourth moment of the finite population total. This inequality is the generalization of a key tool for proving functional central limit theorems in Rio (Asymptotic theory of weakly dependent random processes, Springer, Berlin, 2017). Under the nested sampling strategy, we introduce assumptions on strongly-mixing coefficients and quantile functions to show that a functional stochastic process asymptotically approaches to a Gaussian process.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Inference for Stochastic ProcessesSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207