MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004582666 · doi:10.1002/env.987

Modelling point patterns with the Ivanoff–Merzbach renewal process

2009· article· en· W2004582666 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine F. Davies, W. John Braun

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint processPoint (geometry)Process (computing)Renewal theorySettlement (finance)Computer scienceEconometricsEstimationMaximum likelihoodStatisticsMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper demonstrates how to apply the Ivanoff–Merzbach renewal process (Ivanoff and Merzbach, 2006 ; Ivanoff, 2008 ) to the modelling of environmental and other forms of point process data. The model is explored via simulation, focusing on two special cases. Maximum likelihood estimation of model parameters is described and demonstrated for these cases. The methods are applied to a point pattern related to human settlement patterns and to a point pattern describing the locations of a species of pine. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207