1974
DOI: 10.2307/2334280
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Jackknife--A Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
666
1
16

Year Published

1994
1994
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 658 publications
(696 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
11
666
1
16
Order By: Relevance
“…The random effects were predicted using the adjusted unbiased prediction (AUP) method (Zhu and Weir, 1996). Standard errors of the statistics were obtained by the jackknife procedures (Miller, 1974;Zhu and Weir, 1996) and a two-tail t-test was performed for testing the significance of parameters obtained. The model was also recalculated considering genotype as fixed factor for mean performance accession comparison computing using LSD method at ˛ = 0.05.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The random effects were predicted using the adjusted unbiased prediction (AUP) method (Zhu and Weir, 1996). Standard errors of the statistics were obtained by the jackknife procedures (Miller, 1974;Zhu and Weir, 1996) and a two-tail t-test was performed for testing the significance of parameters obtained. The model was also recalculated considering genotype as fixed factor for mean performance accession comparison computing using LSD method at ˛ = 0.05.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are good reasons to suspect that the jackknife approach (e.g., Efron, 1981;Jackson, 1986;Miller, 1974;Mosteller & Tukey, 1977) may provide more accurate estimates of latency differences than the approach of scoring of single-participant waveforms. With the jackknife approach, latencies are scored for each of n grand average waveforms, with each of the grand average waveforms computed from a subsample of n À 1 of the n individual participants (i.e., each participant is omitted from one of the subsample grand averages).…”
Section: The Jackknife Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The entire sample was used for the creation of the model, and cross-validation was performed by using a jackknife approach, 23 dividing the whole sample into 10 mutually exclusive groups by random method; 10 different regression models were estimated, with each model excluding one group; each model was used to calculate predictions for the excluded group. Predicted risks for individual patients from the excluded groups were then compared with predictions based on the entire sample.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%