MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297337040 · doi:10.1214/22-bjps536

Estimation of trace-variogram using Legendre–Gauss quadrature

2022· article· en· W4297337040 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gilberto Sassi, Chang Chiann

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Probability and Statistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorVariogramMathematicsApplied mathematicsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Legendre polynomialsQuadrature (astronomy)Gaussian quadratureGaussianAlgorithmMathematical optimizationStatisticsMathematical analysisKrigingNyström method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional Data Analysis is known for its application in several fields of science. In some cases, functional datasets are constituted by spatially indexed curves. The primary goal of this paper is to supply a straightforward and precise approach to interpolate these curves, that is, the aim is to estimate a curve at an unmonitored location. It is proven that the best linear unbiased estimator for this unsampled curve is the solution of a linear system, where the coefficients and the constant terms of the system are formed using a function called trace-variogram. In this paper, we propose using Legendre-Gauss quadrature to estimate the trace-variogram. This estimator’s suitable numerical properties are shown in simulation studies for normal and non-normal datasets. Simulation results indicated that the proposed methodology outperforms the established estimation procedure. An R package was built and is available at the CRAN repository. The novel estimation methodology is illustrated with a real dataset on temperature curves from 35 weather stations in Canada.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of Probability and StatisticsSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207