MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042763844

Resampling methods in economics

2007· dissertation· en· W7042763844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2007
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBootstrapping (finance)ResamplingNonparametric statisticsQuantileConfidence intervalQuantile regressionRegressionBootstrap aggregating
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation is to investigate the application of bootstrapping methods in economics, for both theoretical and empirical analysis. The size and power of two J-type tests, a bootstrap and a pretest test, are compared for weakly correlated or nearly orthogonal non-nested regression models. Within the field of time series, the bootstrap technique is combined with the nonparametric methodology to estimate conditional quantiles for financial time series. Three newly developed bootstrap based methods (nonparametric wild bootstrap, block bootstrap and subsampling) are adopted, and the local linear nonparametric estimation is then used to estimate the conditional quantile. Moving block bootstrap is applied to generate confidence intervals for the conditional quantile estimation. The last part is to use semi-parametric models to explain university participation decisions of Canadian families with use of cross-sectional micro-data. The family's permanent income is estimated at the first stage and then included into the nonparametric part of the semi-parametric model. The wild bootstrap method is applied to generate confidence intervals of estimates to deal with the problem of introducing a generated regressor into regression models.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207