DEEPEAST technique to enhance power in two-sample tests via the same-attraction function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data depth has emerged as an invaluable nonparametric measure for the ranking of multivariate samples. The main contribution of depth-based two-sample comparisons is the introduction of the Q statistic (Liu and Singh, 1993), a quality index. Unlike traditional methods, data depth does not require the assumption of normal distributions and adheres to four fundamental properties. Many existing two-sample homogeneity tests, which assess mean and/or scale changes in distributions often suffer from low statistical power or indeterminate asymptotic distributions. To overcome these challenges, we introduced a DEEPEAST (depth-explored same-attraction sample-to-sample central-outward ranking) technique for improving statistical power in two-sample tests via the same-attraction function. We proposed two novel and powerful depth-based test statistics: the sum test statistic and the product test statistic, which are rooted in Q statistics, share a "common attractor" and are applicable across all depth functions. We further proved the asymptotic distribution of these statistics for various depth functions. To assess the performance of power gain, we apply three depth functions: Mahalanobis depth (Liu and Singh, 1993), Spatial depth (Brown, 1958; Gower, 1974), and Projection depth (Liu, 1992). Through two-sample simulations, we have demonstrated that our sum and product statistics exhibit superior power performance, utilizing a strategic block permutation algorithm and compare favourably with popular methods in literature. Our tests are further validated through analysis on Raman spectral data, acquired from cellular and tissue samples, highlighting the effectiveness of the proposed tests highlighting the effective discrimination between health and cancerous samples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".