MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058356912 · doi:10.1239/jap/1276784897

On the number of runs for Bernoulli arrays

2010· article· en· W2058356912 on OpenAlexafffund
Djilali Ait Aoudia, Éric Marchand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMathematicsMultinomial distributionRowBernoulli's principleIndependent and identically distributed random variablesCombinatoricsBernoulli trialRow and column spacesSampling (signal processing)Bernoulli processStatisticsRandom variableComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce and motivate the study of (n + 1) × r arrays X with Bernoulli entries Xk,j and independently distributed rows. We study the distribution of which denotes the number of consecutive pairs of successes (or runs of length 2) when reading the array down the columns and across the rows. With the case r = 1 having been studied by several authors, and permitting some initial inferences for the general case r > 1, we examine various distributional properties and representations of Sn for the case r = 2, and, using a more explicit analysis, the case of multinomial and identically distributed rows. Applications are also given in cases where the array X arises from a Pólya sampling scheme.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ProbabilitySame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207