MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992113455 · doi:10.1063/1.3663521

Robust Designs for Three Commonly Used Nonlinear Models

2011· article· en· W1992113455 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

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomoscedasticityHeteroscedasticityExtrapolationNonlinear systemMinimaxExponential functionComputer scienceMathematicsNon-linear least squaresLeast-squares function approximationMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsEstimation theoryEconometricsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the robust designs for a few nonlinear models, including an exponential model with an intercept, a compartmental model, and a Michaelis‐Menten model, when these models are possibly misspecified. The minimax robust designs we considered in this paper are under consideration of not only minimizing the variances but also reducing the possible biases in estimation. Both prediction and extrapolation cases are discussed. The robust designs are found incorporating the approximation of these models with several situations such as homoscedasticity, and heteroscedasticity. Both ordinary and weighted nonlinear least squares methods are utilized.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.609
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.188 · 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