Semi-parametric inference on Gini indices of two semi-continuous populations under density ratio models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The Gini index is a popular inequality measure with many applications in social and economic studies. This paper studies semi-parametric inference on the Gini indices of two semi-continuous populations. We characterise the distribution of each semi-continuous population by a mixture of a discrete point mass at zero and a continuous skewed positive component. A semi-parametric density ratio model is then employed to link the positive components of the two distributions. We propose the maximum empirical likelihood estimators of the two Gini indices and their difference, and further investigate the asymptotic properties of the proposed estimators. The asymptotic results enable us to construct confidence intervals, and perform hypothesis tests for the two Gini indices and their difference. The proposed method is also applicable to cases without excessive zero values. The superiority of our proposed method over some existing methods is shown theoretically and numerically. Two real-data applications are presented for illustration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it