Nonparametric High-Dimensional Multi-Sample Tests based on Graph Theory
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
High-dimensional data pose unique challenges for data processing in an era of ever-increasing amounts of data availability. Graph theory can provide a structure of high-dimensional data. We introduce two key properties desirable for graphs in testing homogeneity. Roughly speaking, these properties may be described as: unboundedness of edge counts under the same distribution and boundedness of edge counts under different distributions. It turns out that the minimum spanning tree violates these properties but the shortest Hamiltonian path posses them. Based on the shortest Hamiltonian path, we propose two combinations of edge counts in multiple samples to test for homogeneity. We give the permutation null distributions of proposed statistics when sample sizes go to infinity. The power is analyzed by assuming both sample sizes and dimensionality tend to infinity. Simulations show that our new tests behave very well overall in comparison with various competitors. Real data analysis of tumors and images further convince the value of our proposed tests. Software implementing the test is available in the R package GRelevance. Supplemental materials for this article are available online.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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