Formal verification of tail distribution bounds in the HOL theorem prover
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Tail distribution bounds play a major role in the estimation of failure probabilities in performance and reliability analysis of systems. They are usually estimated using Markov's and Chebyshev's inequalities, which represent tail distribution bounds for a random variable in terms of its mean or variance. This paper presents the formal verification of Markov's and Chebyshev's inequalities for discrete random variables using a higher‐order‐logic theorem prover. The paper also provides the formal verification of mean and variance relations for some of the widely used discrete random variables, such as Uniform( m ), Bernoulli( p ), Geometric( p ) and Binomial( m, p ) random variables. This infrastructure allows us to precisely reason about the tail distribution properties and thus turns out to be quite useful for the analysis of systems used in safety‐critical domains, such as space, medicine or transportation. For illustration purposes, we present the performance analysis of the coupon collector's problem, a well‐known commercially used algorithm. Copyright © 2008 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it