MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034185785

Statistical approaches to copula model selection

2015· other· en· W7034185785 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)ChenModel selectionRandomnessSelection (genetic algorithm)Statistical hypothesis testing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copula model selection is an important problem because similar but differing copula models can offer different conclusions about the nature of association of random variables. The method proposed by Chen and Fan (The Canadian Journal of Statistics, 2005), herein referred to as the CF method, involves a statistical hypothesis test which accounts for the randomness of the AIC and other likelihood-based model selection methods. This thesis characterizes the performance of the CF method through simulation. Though higher sensitivity is found in certain situations there is a tradeoff in the CF method’s ability to exclude candidate models and the computational intensity of the CF method. This thesis also proposes an approach for directly comparing p-values of a hypothesis test with delta values for likelihood-based selection criteria.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicUrbanism, Landscape, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207