Robust joint modelling of sparsely observed paired functional data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A reduced‐rank mixed‐effects model is developed for robust modelling of sparsely observed paired functional data. In this model, the curves for each functional variable are summarized using a few functional principal components, and the association of the two functional variables is modelled through the association of the principal component scores. A multivariate‐scale mixture of normal distributions is used to model the principal component scores and the measurement errors in order to handle outlying observations and achieve robust inference. The mean functions and principal component functions are modelled using splines, and roughness penalties are applied to avoid overfitting. An EM algorithm is developed for computation of model fitting and prediction. A simulation study shows that the proposed method outperforms an existing method, which is not designed for robust estimation. The effectiveness of the proposed method is illustrated through an application of fitting multiband light curves of Type Ia supernovae.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →1 of 3 models called this metaresearch. This work is contested: it sits on the field's empirical boundary, and whether it counts depends on which model you asked. It is one of the 51 works in the disagreement dossier.
Develops and compares a robust statistical estimator for paired functional data, studying its properties via simulation against an existing method; borderline between statistical-methods research and pure domain statistics.
This develops a statistical model for functional data, not a study of how research is conducted.
Develops a robust statistical model for paired functional data (supernova light curves); domain methods development, not study of research.
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".