MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000045933 · doi:10.1214/11-ejs594

A Metropolis-Hastings based method for sampling from the G-Wishart distribution in Gaussian graphical models

2011· article· en· W2000045933 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Statistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoToronto Public Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWishart distributionMathematicsMetropolis–Hastings algorithmGaussianDeviance (statistics)Graphical modelConjugate priorSampling (signal processing)StatisticsApplied mathematicsAlgorithmPrior probabilityComputer scienceMarkov chain Monte CarloBayesian probabilityMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Gaussian graphical models, the conjugate prior for the precision matrix K is called G-Wishart distribution, WG(δ,D). In this paper we propose a new sampling method for the WG(δ,D) based on the Metropolis Hastings algorithm and we show its validity through a number of numerical experiments. We show that this method can be easily used to estimate the Deviance Information Criterion, providing with a computationally inexpensive approach for model selection.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.275 · 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