Combination Test for Mean Shift and Variance Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers a new mean-variance model with strong mixing errors and describes a combination test for the mean shift and variance change. Under some stationarity and symmetry conditions, the important limiting distribution for a combination test is obtained, which can derive the limiting distributions for the mean change test and variance change test. As an application, an algorithm for a three-step method to detect the change-points is given. For example, the first step is to test whether there is at least a change-point. The second and third steps are to detect the mean change-point and the variance change-point, respectively. To illustrate our results, some simulations and real-world data analysis are discussed. The analysis shows that our tests not only have high powers, but can also determine the mean change-point or variance change-point. Compared to the existing methods of cpt.meanvar and mosum from the R package, the new method has the advantages of recognition capability and accuracy.
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 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 | 0.033 | 0.156 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".