Bayesian Methods for Completing Data in Spatial Models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chow and Lin (1971) were the first to develop a unified framework for the three problems(interpolation, extrapolation and distribution) of predicting times series by related series(the ‘indicators’). This paper develops a spatial Chow-Lin procedure for cross-sectional data and compares the classical and Bayesian estimation methods. We outline the error covariance structure in a spatial context and derive the BLUE for ML and Bayesian MCMC estimation. In an example, we apply the procedure to Spanish regional GDP data between2000 and 2004. We assume that only NUTS-2 GDP is known and predict GDP at NUTS-3level by using socio-economic and spatial information available at NUTS-3. The spatial neighbourhood is defined by either km distance, travel time, contiguity or trade relationships. After running some sensitivity analysis, we present the forecast accuracy criteria comparing the predicted values with the observed ones.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it