MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The History of the Dirichlet and Liouville Distributions

2001· article· en· W2076179404 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Statistical Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirichlet distributionMathematicsScrutinyConcentration parameterLatent Dirichlet allocationGeneralized Dirichlet distributionDirichlet integralStatisticsProbability distributionApplied mathematicsSubject (documents)Statistical physicsEconometricsDirichlet seriesMathematical analysisPhysicsComputer sciencePhilosophyTopic modelInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The Dirichlet distributions have long been the subject of intense scrutiny in statistics and probability. Despite the enormous interest in, and wide‐ranging applications of, these distributions, little appears to be known about their history. In this article we review the development of the Dirichlet distributions and their companions, the Liouville distributions. After reviewing some integral formulas of Dirichlet and Liouville, we survey the theory and applications of these distributions in statistics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.283 · 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