MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100787394

Errors-in-variables models: a generalized functions approach

2009· article· en· W7100787394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonparametric statisticsChenEstimatorMoment (physics)Nonparametric regressionParametric statisticsCalculus (dental)Semiparametric regression
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identi…cation in errors-in-variables regression models was recently extended to wide models classes by S. Schennach (Econometrica, 2007) (S) via use of generalized functions. In this paper the problems of nonand semi- parametric identi…cation in such models are re-examined. Nonparametric identi…cation holds under weaker assumptions than in (S); the proof here does not rely on decomposition of generalized functions into ordinary and singular parts, which may not hold. Conditions for continuity of the identi…cation mapping are provided and a consistent nonparametric plug-in estimator for regression functions in the L1space constructed. Semiparametric identi…cation via a …nite set of moments is shown to hold for classes of functions that are explicitly The support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), the Fonds québecois de la recherche sur la société et la culture (FRQSC) is gratefully acknowledged. The author thanks participants in the Cowles Foundation conference, the UK ESG, CEA 2009 and Stats in the Chateau meetings and P.C.B.Phillips, X. Chen and Denis Nekipelov for illuminating discussions and suggestions. An anonymous referee provided a very thorough report containing many important points and suggestions. The remaining errors are all mine. 1 characterized; unlike (S) existence of a moment generating function for the measurement error is not required.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.190
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207