MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077034502 · doi:10.1111/anzs.12102

Statistical Inference for Curved Fibrous Objects in 3D – Based on Multiple Short Observations of Multivariate Autoregressive Processes

2015· article· en· W2077034502 on OpenAlexaff
Gerd Gaiselmann, Rafał Kulik, Volker Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsAutoregressive modelEstimatorMultivariate statisticsMathematicsStatistical inferenceInferenceSTAR modelApplied mathematicsStatistical modelStatisticsComputer scienceAutoregressive integrated moving averageTime seriesArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary This paper deals with statistical inference on the parameters of a stochastic model, describing curved fibrous objects in three dimensions, that is based on multivariate autoregressive processes. The model is fitted to experimental data consisting of a large number of short independently sampled trajectories of multivariate autoregressive processes. We discuss relevant statistical properties (e.g. asymptotic behaviour as the number of trajectories tends to infinity) of the maximum likelihood (ML) estimators for such processes. Numerical studies are also performed to analyse some of the more intractable properties of the ML estimators. Finally the whole methodology, i.e., the fibre model and its statistical inference, is applied to appropriately describe the tracking of fibres in real materials.

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)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of StatisticsSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207