On the Bayesianity of maximum likelihood estimators of restricted location parameters under absolute value error loss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the potential Bayesianity of maximum likelihood estimators (MLE), under absolute value error loss, for estimating the location parameter θ of symmetric and unimodal density functions in the presence of (i) a lower (or upper) bounded constraint, and (ii) an interval constraint, for θ . With these problems being expressed in terms of integral equations, we establish for logconcave densities: the generalized Bayesianity of the MLE in (i) ; and the proper Bayesianity and admissibility of the MLE in (ii) which extends the normal model result of Iwasa and Moritani. In (i) , a key feature concerns a correspondence with a Riemann–Hilbert problem, while in (ii) we use Fredholm´s technique and a contraction mapping argument. We demonstrate that logconcavity is a critical condition with sufficient conditions for non-Bayesianity and, accordingly, with a class of counterexamples. Note that the Bayesianity of the MLE under absolute value loss in the restricted location parameter case is in marked counterdistinction to that under quadratic loss, where, typically, a generalized Bayes estimator must be a smooth function. Finally, various other remarks, illustrations and numerical evaluations are provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.227 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".