MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W94208768 · doi:10.1002/jae.2508

Wild Bootstrap Inference for Wildly Different Cluster Sizes

2016· article· en· W94208768 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Econometrics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorCluster (spacecraft)EconometricsStatisticsVariance (accounting)Monte Carlo methodInferenceMathematicsComputer scienceEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The cluster robust variance estimator (CRVE) relies on the number of clusters being sufficiently large. Monte Carlo evidence suggests that the ‘rule of 42’ is not true for unbalanced clusters. Rejection frequencies are higher for datasets with 50 clusters proportional to US state populations than with 50 balanced clusters. Using critical values based on the wild cluster bootstrap performs much better. However, this procedure fails when a small number of clusters is treated. We explain why CRVE t statistics and the wild bootstrap fail in this case, study the ‘effective number’ of clusters and simulate placebo laws with dummy variable regressors. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.256 · 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