MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096738650 · doi:10.1239/jap/1331216842

Continuous, Discrete, and Conditional Scan Statistics

2012· article· en· W2096738650 on OpenAlexafffund
James C. Fu, Tung-Lung Wu, Wendy Lou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Probability · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScan statisticBernoulli trialMathematicsSufficient statisticStatisticStatisticsConditional probability distributionDiscrete-time stochastic processDiscrete phase-type distributionMarkov chainBernoulli's principleConditional expectationChain rule (probability)Applied mathematicsProbability distributionStochastic processProbability mass functionMarkov propertyRegular conditional probabilityMarkov modelContinuous-time stochastic process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distributions for continuous, discrete, and conditional discrete scan statistics are studied. The approach of finite Markov chain imbedding, which has been applied to random permutations as well as to runs and patterns, is extended to compute the distribution of the conditional discrete scan statistic, defined from a sequence of Bernoulli trials. It is shown that the distribution of the continuous scan statistic induced by a Poisson process defined on (0, 1] is a limiting distribution of weighted distributions of conditional discrete scan statistics. Comparisons of rates of convergence as well as numerical comparisons of various bounds and approximations are provided to illustrate the theoretical results.

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)0.096
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied ProbabilitySame topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207