MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W174811566

On Undirected Representations of Bayesian Networks

2001· article· en· W174811566 on OpenAlexaff
S. K. M. Wong, Cory J. Butz, Dan Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentation (politics)Bayesian networkProbabilistic logicComputer scienceHierarchyMarkov chainTheoretical computer scienceInferenceCliqueMarkov processBayesian probabilityStatistical modelArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical studies clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of the nested jointree (NJT) representation in probabilistic inference. A NJT is a traditional Markov network (MN) together with a possible local MN nested in each clique. These nested MNs can themselves contain other nested MNs in a recursivemanner. However, the NJT representation is not necessarily a faithful representation of a given Bayesian network (BN). This means that the effectiveness of a NJT has been demonstrated while only exploiting some of the independency information available in the given BN. In this paper, weintroduce a new kind of probabilistic network, called a hierarchical Markov network (HMN). A HMN is a hierarchy of MNs. We give an algorithm to transform a BN into a canonical HMN. The main result of this paper is that the constructed HMN is unique and equivalent to the input BN. Since HMNs are a faithful representation of BNs, a query may be optimized using independencies in a HMN that otherwise would have gone unrepresentedinaNJTapproach. 1

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207