MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992777855 · doi:10.3166/ria.21.295-332

Exact and approximate inference in ProBT

2007· article· fr· W1992777855 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceComputer scienceBayesian inferenceFiducial inferenceFrequentist inferenceProbabilistic logicPredictive inferenceStatistical inferenceMonte Carlo methodBayesian networkInference engineMachine learningAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceBayesian probabilityMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a unifying framework for and inference in Bayesian networks. This framework is used in ProBT, a general purpose inference engine for probabilistic reasoning and incremental model construction. This paper is not intended to present ProB T but to describe its underlying algorithms mainly the Successive Restrictions Algorithm (SRA) for inference, and the Monte Carlo Simultaneous Estimation and Maximization (MCSEM) algorithm for inference problems. The main idea of ProBT is to use probability expressions that can be exact or approximate as basic bricks to build more complex models incrementally.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.235 · 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