MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248615235 · doi:10.1093/jssam/smab047

A Rescaling Bootstrap Approach For Imputed Survey Data

2021· article· en· W4248615235 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey Statistics and Methodology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImputation (statistics)EstimatorStatisticsMathematicsEconometricsVariance (accounting)Computer scienceMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Imputation is usually used to deal with item nonresponse in surveys. Treating the imputed values as true observations may obviously lead to serious underestimation of the variance of point estimators. In this article, we propose a new bootstrap method under the rescaling bootstrap approach for estimating the variance of an imputed estimator obtained after applying deterministic regression or random hot-deck imputation. A novel technique is used to rescale the original data set through solving certain systems of linear equations. The proposed procedure can handle unequal response probabilities and large sampling fractions. Some simulation studies are conducted to show the great performance of the proposed method in terms of relative bias, relative efficiency, and coverage probability, for both population mean and median.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.857
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.304 · 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