MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036667289 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11132

Objective Bayesian analysis of spatial data with uncertain nugget and range parameters

2012· article· en· W2036667289 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Hannes Kazianka, Jürgen Pilz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian probabilityRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceSpatial analysisEconometricsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors develop default priors for the Gaussian random field model that includes a nugget parameter accounting for the effects of microscale variations and measurement errors. They present the independence Jeffreys prior, the Jeffreys‐rule prior and a reference prior and study posterior propriety of these and related priors. They show that the uniform prior for the correlation parameters yields an improper posterior. In case of known regression and variance parameters, they derive the Jeffreys prior for the correlation parameters. They prove posterior propriety and obtain that the predictive distributions at ungauged locations have finite variance. Moreover, they show that the proposed priors have good frequentist properties, except for those based on the marginal Jeffreys‐rule prior for the correlation parameters, and illustrate their approach by analyzing a dataset of zinc concentrations along the river Meuse.The Canadian Journal of Statistics40: 304–327; 2012 © 2012 Statistical Society of Canada

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations40
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207