Sample-based Maximum Likelihood Estimation of the Autologistic Model
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
New recursive algorithms for fast computation of the normalizing constant for the autologistic model on the lattice make feasible a sample-based maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) of the autologistic parameters. We demonstrate by sampling from 12 simulated 420×420 binary lattices with square lattice plots of size 4×4, …, 7×7 and sample sizes between 20 and 600. Sample-based results are compared with 'benchmark' MCMC estimates derived from all binary observations on a lattice. Sample-based estimates are, on average, biased systematically by 3%-7%, a bias that can be reduced by more than half by a set of calibrating equations. MLE estimates of sampling variances are large and usually conservative. The variance of the parameter of spatial association is about 2-10 times higher than the variance of the parameter of abundance. Sample distributions of estimates were mostly non-normal. We conclude that sample-based MLE estimation of the autologistic parameters with an appropriate sample size and post-estimation calibration will furnish fully acceptable estimates. Equations for predicting the expected sampling variance are given.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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