MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256738458 · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13757

Three Essays on Statistical Inference on Inequality Measures

2019· dissertation· en· W4256738458 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdallah Zalghout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsInferenceQuantileMathematicsStatistical inferenceEconometricsEntropy (arrow of time)EstimatorPermutation (music)Sampling distributionStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing reliable inference on inequality measures is an enduring challenge, mainly due to the complications arising from nonlinearities in their definitions and from the complex nature of the underlying distributions which are typically characterized by extremely heavy tails.The thesis is concerned with proposing non-standard asymptotic and simulation-based inference procedures for moment-based inequality measures (general entropy family of inequality indices) and quantile-based measures (quantile ratio index).Inference on both types of measures is prone to heavy-tailed distributions complications and to the ratio-induced identification issues.In addition to that, moment-based measures are subject to the so-called Bahadur-Savage impossibility problem while quantile-based measures are not.On the other hand, the main difficulty with inference on quantile-based measures is the dependence of the quantile variance on the underlying density function which involves kernel estimation and bandwidth selection.The first chapter of my thesis introduces a Fieller-type method for the Theil Index and assess its finite-sample properties by a Monte Carlo simulation study.The fact that almost all inequality indices can be written as a ratio of functions of moments Flachaire (Aix-Marseille University) for their guidance with the first two chapters.Working with them has helped me sharpen my research skills and enrich my knowledge of econometrics and income inequality.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyFrench-language works237,207