Distance Correlation in Multiple Biased Sampling Models
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
Testing the independence between random vectors is a fundamental problem in statistics. Distance correlation, a recently popular dependence measure, is universally consistent for testing independence against all distributions with finite moments. However, when data are subject to selection bias or collected from multiple sources or schemes, spurious dependence may arise. This creates a need for methods that can effectively utilize data from different sources and correct these biases. In this paper, we study the estimation of distance covariance and distance correlation under multiple biased sampling models, which provide a natural framework for addressing these issues. Theoretical properties, including the strong consistency and asymptotic null distributions of the distance covariance and correlation estimators, and the rate at which the test statistic diverges under sequences of alternatives approaching the null, are established. A weighted permutation procedure is proposed to determine the critical value of the independence test. Simulation studies demonstrate that our approach improves both the estimation of distance correlation and the power of the test.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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