MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1541774414 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1301.3861

Inference for Belief Networks Using Coupling From the Past

2013· article· en· W1541774414 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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGibbs samplingInferenceConvergence (economics)Coupling (piping)Computer scienceSampling (signal processing)Sampling distributionSet (abstract data type)Distribution (mathematics)AlgorithmState (computer science)Applied mathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMathematical optimizationStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inference for belief networks using Gibbs sampling produces a distribution for unobserved variables that differs from the correct distribution by a (usually) unknown error, since convergence to the right distribution occurs only asymptotically. The method of "coupling from the past" samples from exactly the correct distribution by (conceptually) running dependent Gibbs sampling simulations from every possible starting state from a time far enough in the past that all runs reach the same state at time t=0. Explicitly considering every possible state is intractable for large networks, however. We propose a method for layered noisy-or networks that uses a compact, but often imprecise, summary of a set of states. This method samples from exactly the correct distribution, and requires only about twice the time per step as ordinary Gibbs sampling, but it may require more simulation steps than would be needed if chains were tracked exactly.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.105 · 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