MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400368343 · doi:10.1111/stan.12344

A note on trigonometric regression in the presence of Berkson‐type measurement error

2024· article· en· W4400368343 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistica Neerlandica · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsCovariateResidualTrigonometryMean squared errorObservational errorRegression analysisRegressionApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this note, we study how parameter vector estimation for a trigonometric regression model and the expected squared residual error computed from an estimated model are affected by Berkson‐type measurement error. Closed‐form expressions for the parameter vector and the expected squared residual error are obtained by assuming that the observed covariate data are sampled from an equispaced design and that measurement error is generated from a symmetric probability distribution with a mean of zero. Notably, these results indicate that estimates of the amplitude parameters for a trigonometric regression model suffer from attenuation bias when covariate data are mis‐measured, and that estimates of the phase‐shift parameters are unbiased.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.191
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.260 · 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