MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083533121 · doi:10.1109/isit.2014.6875037

New bounds on the probability of a finite union of events

2014· article· en· W2083533121 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Yang, Fady Alajaji, Glen Takahara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpper and lower boundsAdditive white Gaussian noiseMathematicsDecoding methodsPairwise error probabilityPhase-shift keyingEvent (particle physics)Pairwise comparisonCombinatoricsAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationStatisticsWhite noiseBit error rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classes of all lower/upper bounds on the probability of a finite union of events which are expressed only in terms of the individual event probabilities and the sums of the pairwise event probabilities are considered. The optimal lower and upper bounds in each class are given numerically by solving a linear programming (LP) problem. Furthermore, a suboptimal analytical lower bound is established by solving a relaxed LP problem, which is at least as good as an existing bound due to Kuai, et al. [1]. Note that the new lower bounds can be further improved algorithmically by optimizing them over subsets [2], [3], and can be applied to general estimation problems involving the probability of a finite union. Finally, the new lower/upper bounds are illustrated by examining the symbol and bit error rates of an uncoded communication system used in conjunction with Mary phase-shift keying (PSK) modulation over additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channels under maximum a posteriori (MAP) decoding.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.014
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0030.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207