Paper A v3.3: apply codex v3.2 peer-review fixes
Codex (gpt-5.4) second-round review recommended 'minor revision'. This commit addresses all issues flagged in that review. ## Structural fixes - dHash calibration inconsistency (codex #1, most important): Clarified in Section III-L that the <=5 and <=15 dHash cutoffs come from the whole-sample Firm A cosine-conditional dHash distribution (median=5, P95=15), not from the calibration-fold independent-minimum dHash distribution (median=2, P95=9) which we report elsewhere as descriptive anchors. Added explicit note about the two dHash conventions and their relationship. - Section IV-H framing (codex #2): Renamed "Firm A Benchmark Validation: Threshold-Independent Evidence" to "Additional Firm A Benchmark Validation" and clarified in the section intro that H.1 uses a fixed 0.95 cutoff, H.2 is fully threshold-free, H.3 uses the calibrated classifier. H.3's concluding sentence now says "the substantive evidence lies in the cross-firm gap" rather than claiming the test is threshold-free. - Table XVI 93,979 typo fixed (codex #3): Corrected to 84,354 total (83,970 same-firm + 384 mixed-firm). - Held-out Firm A denominator 124+54=178 vs 180 (codex #4): Added explicit note that 2 CPAs were excluded due to disambiguation ties in the CPA registry. - Table VIII duplication (codex #5): Removed the duplicate accountant-level-only Table VIII comment; the comprehensive cross-level Table VIII subsumes it. Text now says "accountant-level rows of Table VIII (below)". - Anonymization broken in Tables XIV-XVI (codex #6): Replaced "Deloitte"/"KPMG"/"PwC"/"EY" with "Firm A"/"Firm B"/"Firm C"/ "Firm D" across Tables XIV, XV, XVI. Table and caption language updated accordingly. - Table X unit mismatch (codex #7): Dropped precision, recall, F1 columns. Table now reports FAR (against the inter-CPA negative anchor) with Wilson 95% CIs and FRR (against the byte-identical positive anchor). III-K and IV-G.1 text updated to justify the change. ## Sentence-level fixes - "three independent statistical methods" in Methodology III-A -> "three methodologically distinct statistical methods". - "three independent methods" in Conclusion -> "three methodologically distinct methods". - Abstract "~0.006 converging" now explicitly acknowledges that BD/McCrary produces no significant accountant-level discontinuity. - Conclusion ditto. - Discussion limitation sentence "BD/McCrary should be interpreted at the accountant level for threshold-setting purposes" rewritten to reflect v3.3 result that BD/McCrary is a diagnostic, not a threshold estimator, at the accountant level. - III-H "two analyses" -> "three analyses" (H.1 longitudinal stability, H.2 partner ranking, H.3 intra-report consistency). - Related Work White 1982 overclaim rewritten: "consistent estimators of the pseudo-true parameter that minimizes KL divergence" replaces "guarantees asymptotic recovery". - III-J "behavior is close to discrete" -> "practice is clustered". - IV-D.2 pivot sentence "discreteness of individual behavior yields bimodality" -> "aggregation over signatures reveals clustered (though not sharply discrete) patterns". Target journal remains IEEE Access. Output: Paper_A_IEEE_Access_Draft_v3.docx (395 KB). Codex v3.2 review saved to paper/codex_review_gpt54_v3_2.md. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ The BD/McCrary pairing is well suited to detecting the boundary between two gene
|
||||
*Finite mixture models.*
|
||||
When the empirical distribution is viewed as a weighted sum of two (or more) latent component distributions, the Expectation-Maximization algorithm [40] provides consistent maximum-likelihood estimates of the component parameters.
|
||||
For observations bounded on $[0,1]$---such as cosine similarity and normalized Hamming-based dHash similarity---the Beta distribution is the natural parametric choice, with applications spanning bioinformatics and Bayesian estimation.
|
||||
Under mild regularity conditions, White's quasi-MLE consistency result [41] guarantees asymptotic recovery of the best Beta-family approximation to the true distribution, even when the true distribution is not exactly Beta, provided the model is correctly specified in the broader exponential-family sense.
|
||||
Under mild regularity conditions, White's quasi-MLE result [41] supports interpreting maximum-likelihood estimates under a mis-specified parametric family as consistent estimators of the pseudo-true parameter that minimizes the Kullback-Leibler divergence to the data-generating distribution within that family; we use this result to justify the Beta-mixture fit as a principled approximation rather than as a guarantee that the true distribution is Beta.
|
||||
|
||||
The present study combines all three families, using each to produce an independent threshold estimate and treating cross-method convergence---or principled divergence---as evidence of where in the analysis hierarchy the mixture structure is statistically supported.
|
||||
<!--
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user