MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252172446 · doi:10.1002/9781119501459.ch7

Confidence Region Estimation

2018· other· en· W4252172446 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorStatisticsConfidence intervalMathematicsMean squared errorPoint estimationInterval estimationPopulationRatio estimatorCDF-based nonparametric confidence intervalBootstrapping (finance)Standard deviationConfidence distributionBias of an estimatorEconometricsMinimum-variance unbiased estimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimation in statistics is a procedure for making deductions about population using information derived from a sample. The unbiasedness of an estimator ensures that an average value of the estimator will tend to a value that is equal to the unknown parameter. This chapter discusses two types of estimators: point estimators and interval estimators. While point estimators produce single estimates, interval estimators produce confidence intervals. Mean squared error (MSE) of an estimator is the average of the square of the deviation of the estimator from the quantity estimated. The chapter describes the construction of confidence intervals for population means, population variances, and ratio of two population variances. Confidence interval estimation is used to mean the same thing as one-dimensional confidence region estimation. The chapter also describes the construction of standard and confidence error ellipses for absolute and relative cases in geomatics.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.221
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.221
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.009

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207