MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382202359 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11777

Nonparametric simulation extrapolation for measurement‐error models

2023· article· en· W4382202359 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Dylan Spicker, Michael P. Wallace, Grace Y. Yi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of WaterlooMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsExtrapolationNonparametric statisticsReplicateObservational errorNormalityComputer scienceErrors-in-variables modelsExtension (predicate logic)AlgorithmEconometricsStatisticsMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The presence of measurement error is a widespread issue, which, when ignored, can render the results of an analysis unreliable. Numerous corrections for the effects of measurement error have been proposed and studied, often under the assumption of a normally distributed, additive measurement‐error model. In many situations, observed data are nonsymmetric, heavy‐tailed, or otherwise highly non‐normal. In these settings, correction techniques relying on the assumption of normality are undesirable. We propose an extension of simulation extrapolation that is nonparametric in the sense that no specific distributional assumptions are required on the error terms. The technique can be implemented when either validation data or replicate measurements are available, and is designed to be immediately accessible to those familiar with simulation extrapolation.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207