MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068225596 · doi:10.1198/016214503000000305

The Intrinsic Distribution and Selection Bias of Long-Period Cometary Orbits

2003· article· en· W2068225596 on OpenAlexaff
Peter E. Jupp, Peter T. Kim, Ja‐Yong Koo, Paul Wiegert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicField-Flow Fractionation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Period (music)Distribution (mathematics)Celestial spherePhysicsStatistical physicsMathematicsMechanism (biology)StatisticsAstrophysicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A question that arises in the study of cometary orbits is whether or not the directed normals to the orbits are uniformly distributed on the celestial sphere. Previous studies by statisticians have not taken selection effects into account and have tended to reject uniformity. Here a plausible selection mechanism is proposed that gives rise to a one-parameter family of distributions on the sphere. Data on long-period comets are analyzed using this one-parameter family. A nonzero selection effect is detected, and its size is estimated. Subject to this selection effect, uniformity of the directed normals can no longer be ruled out.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Statistical AssociationSame topicField-Flow Fractionation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207