MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W107206319

Introducing a Dependence Structure to the Occurences in Studying Precise Large Deviations for the Total Claim Amount

2004· article· en· W107206319 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rob Kaas, Qihe Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbability and Risk Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsLarge deviations theoryMathematicsMathematical economicsStatistical physicsEconometricsStatisticsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we study precise large deviations for a compound sum of claims, in which the claims arrive in groups and the claim numbers in the groups may follow a \ncertain negative dependence structure. We try to build a platform both for the classical large deviation theory and for the modern stochastic ordering theory.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicProbability and Risk ModelsFrench-language works237,207