MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402192391 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11813

Efficient semiparametric estimation in two‐sample comparison via semisupervised learning

2024· article· en· W4402192391 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tao Tan, Shuyi Zhang, Yong Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Shanghai
KeywordsEstimationSample (material)Semiparametric modelSemiparametric regressionComputer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligenceEconometricsMachine learningMathematicsNonparametric statisticsEconomicsRegression analysisChromatographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We develop a general semisupervised framework for statistical inference in the two‐sample comparison setting. Although the supervised Mann–Whitney statistic outperforms many estimators in the two‐sample problem for nonnormally distributed responses, it is excessively inefficient because it ignores large amounts of unlabelled information. To borrow strength from unlabelled data, we propose a class of efficient and adaptive estimators that use two‐step semiparametric imputation. The probabilistic index model is adopted primarily to achieve dimension reduction for multivariate covariates, and a follow‐up reweighting step balances the contributions of labelled and unlabelled data. The asymptotic properties of our estimator are derived with variance comparison through a phase diagram. Efficiency theory shows our estimators achieve the semiparametric variance lower bound if the probabilistic index model is correctly specified, and are more efficient than their supervised counterpart when the model is not degenerate. The asymptotic variance is estimated through a two‐step perturbation resampling procedure. To gauge the finite sample performance, we conducted extensive simulation studies which verify the adaptive nature of our methods with respect to model misspecification. To illustrate the merits of our proposed method, we analyze a dataset concerning homelessness in Los Angeles.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207