Sample-based Maximum Likelihood Estimation of the Autologistic Model
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".