MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059366338 · doi:10.2307/3316039

A new approach to default priors and robust bayes methodology

2001· article· en· W2059366338 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Security AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPrior probabilityBayes' theoremMathematicsBounded functionGaussianMinificationComputer scienceEconometricsApplied mathematicsStatisticsMathematical optimizationBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following the developments in DasGupta et al. (2000), the authors propose and explore a new method for constructing proper default priors and a method for selecting a Bayes estimate from a family. Their results are based on asymptotic expansions of certain marginal correlations. For ease of exposition, most results are presented for location families and squared error loss only. The default prior methodology amounts, ultimately, to the minimization of Fisher information, and hence, Bickel's prior works out as the default prior if the location parameter is bounded. As for the selected Bayes estimate, it corresponds to ‘Gaussian tilting’ of an initial reference prior.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.778

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.293
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.115 · 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