MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366396715 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08329-7_16

Correction to: Identifiability and Estimation of Autoregressive ARCH Models with Measurement Error

2023· book-chapter· en· W4366396715 on OpenAlexaff
Mustafa Salamh, Liqun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueICSA book series in statistics · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentifiabilityAutoregressive modelEstimationArchEconometricsComputer scienceStatisticsApplied mathematicsMathematicsHistoryEconomicsArchaeologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.101
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.101
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2780.179

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueICSA book series in statisticsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207