2026 Utrecht

F 46 completed
Data Tool
unknown / r · tiny
15
Files
4,645
LOC
0
Frameworks
3
Languages

Pipeline State

completed
Run ID
#364392
Phase
done
Progress
1%
Started
Finished
2026-04-13 01:31:02
LLM tokens
0

Pipeline Metadata

Stage
Cataloged
Decision
proceed
Novelty
49.96
Framework unique
Isolation
Last stage change
2026-05-10 03:34:46
Deduplication group #50285
Member of a group with 15 similar repo(s) — canonical #93231 view group →
Top concepts (1)
Project Description
Provenance: Repobility (https://repobility.com) — every score reproducible from /scan/

AI Prompt

Create an R simulation framework for comparing non-probability survey estimators. I need to simulate data for two non-probability samples (bd1, bd2) drawn from a population of N=20,000, featuring both continuous and binary outcomes. The framework should allow running two main simulation studies: one with a standard polynomial DGP and another with a smooth non-monotone DGP. Please include helper functions for creating quantile bases (quartiles and deciles) and structure the code to run simulations using parallel `foreach` with `doRNG` for reproducibility. The final output should support generating Quarto reports for bias, SE, RMSE, and CI coverage.
r simulation statistics non-probability data-analysis
Generated by gemma4:latest

Catalog Information

A simulation framework that compares non‑probability survey estimators using quantile‑based covariate representations.

Description

This project implements a simulation study that evaluates inverse probability weighting (IPW), mass imputation (MI), and doubly robust (DR) estimators under various covariate basis specifications. It generates non‑probability samples from a synthetic population with continuous and binary outcomes, runs 500 replications, and uses parallel processing for reproducibility. The study examines how different quantile‑based representations—quartiles, deciles, and combinations with main covariates—affect bias, variance, and confidence‑interval coverage. Targeted at survey researchers and statisticians, it provides a reproducible benchmark for assessing estimator performance in complex selection mechanisms. The results are saved as RDS files and accompanied by Quarto reports for detailed analysis.

الوصف

يقدم هذا المشروع دراسة محاكاة مقارنة بين مقدرات الاستطلاع غير الاحتمالية باستخدام تمثيلات متغيرات التوزيع على أساس الكمية. يتضمن تحليلًا لمقدرات الوزن العكسي (IPW)، والتقدير بالاستبدال (MI)، والتقدير المزدوج القوي (DR) تحت إعدادات مختلفة لتمثيل المتغيرات، مثل المتغيرات الأصلية، والمؤشرات الكمية عند الربع، والـ deciles، وغيرها. تُجرى المحاكاة على عينة غير احتمالية مستخرجة من مجتمع محاكاة يتضمن نتائج مستمرة ومتغيرة ثنائية، مع تشغيل 500 تكرار باستخدام الحوسبة المتوازية لضمان التكرار. يستهدف الباحثين في مجال الإحصاء والبحوث الاستطلاعية الباحثين الذين يحتاجون إلى تقييم دقة وأداء المقدرات في ظروف اختيار غير خطية أو غير متجانسة. يحل المشروع مشكلة صعوبة قياس الانحياز والتباين في تقديرات الاستطلاع غير الاحتمالية، ويقدم إطارًا قابلًا للتكرار لتجربة سيناريوهات مختلفة. يميز المشروع نفسه بتركيزه على تمثيلات الكمية الدقيقة والقدرة على تحسين التقديرات عبر استخدام شبكات كميات أكثر دقة مثل الـ deciles.

Novelty

7/10

Tags

simulation survey-estimation non-probability-sampling quantile-basis bias-analysis reproducible-research

Claude Models

claude-opus-4.6

Quality Score

F
46.0/100
Structure
39
Code Quality
48
Documentation
40
Testing
0
Practices
74
Security
90
Dependencies
50

Strengths

  • Good security practices \u2014 no major issues detected

Weaknesses

  • No LICENSE file \u2014 legal ambiguity for contributors
  • No tests found \u2014 high risk of regressions
  • No CI/CD configuration \u2014 manual testing and deployment
  • Potential hardcoded secrets in 1 files
  • 179 duplicate lines detected \u2014 consider DRY refactoring
  • 1 'god files' with >500 LOC need decomposition

Recommendations

  • Add a test suite \u2014 start with critical path integration tests
  • Set up CI/CD (GitHub Actions recommended) to automate testing and deployment
  • Add a linter configuration to enforce code style consistency
  • Add a LICENSE file (MIT recommended for open source)
  • Move hardcoded secrets to environment variables or a secrets manager

Security & Health

7.1h
Tech Debt (C)
A
OWASP (100%)
FAIL
Quality Gate
A
Risk (16)
Repobility's GitHub App fixes findings like these · https://github.com/apps/repobility-bot
Unknown
License
19.2%
Duplication
Full Security Report AI Fix Prompts SARIF SBOM

Languages

r
96.3%
markdown
2.4%
json
1.3%

Frameworks

None detected

Concepts (1)

Repobility · the analyzer behind every row · https://repobility.com
CategoryNameDescriptionConfidence
Repobility (the analyzer behind this table) · https://repobility.com
auto_descriptionProject DescriptionSimulation study comparing non-probability survey estimators using quantile-based covariate representations. Prepared for the 2026 Utrecht conference.80%

Quality Timeline

1 quality score recorded.

View File Metrics

Embed Badge

Add to your README:

![Quality](https://repos.aljefra.com/badge/88560.svg)
Quality BadgeSecurity Badge
Export Quality CSVDownload SBOMExport Findings CSV