MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403479571 · doi:10.3390/stats7040067

Preliminary Test Estimation for Parallel 2-Sampling in Autoregressive Model

2024· article· en· W4403479571 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Ejaz Ahmed, Arsalane Chouaib Guidoum, Sara Bendjeddou

Bibliographic record

VenueStats · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAutoregressive modelEstimationTest (biology)STAR modelSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsAutoregressive integrated moving averageEngineeringTime seriesGeologyComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the problem of estimation and testing the equality of two autoregressive parameters of two first-order autoregressive processes AR(1), where for each process, the observations are made at different time points. The primary interest is to propose the testing procedures for the homogeneity of autocorrelation parameters ρ1 and ρ2. Furthermore, we are interested in estimating ρ1 under uncertain and weak prior information about the possible equality of ρ1 and ρ2, though we may not have full confidence in the tenacity of this information. A large sample test for the homogeneity of the parameters is developed. Pooled “P” (or restricted estimator) and preliminary test “PT” estimators are proposed, and their properties are investigated and compared with the unrestricted estimator “UE” of ρ1.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.155
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.155
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.200
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207