Reliability estimation in stress–strength models: an MCMC approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we consider the estimation of the stress–strength parameter R=P(Y<X) when X and Y are independent and both are modified Weibull distributions with the common two shape parameters but different scale parameters. The Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling method is used for posterior inference of the reliability of the stress–strength model. The maximum-likelihood estimator of R and its asymptotic distribution are obtained. Based on the asymptotic distribution, the confidence interval of R can be obtained using the delta method. We also propose a bootstrap confidence interval of R. The Bayesian estimators with balanced loss function, using informative and non-informative priors, are derived. Different methods and the corresponding confidence intervals are compared using Monte Carlo simulations. Keywords: stress–strength modelmodified Weibull distributionmaximum-likelihood estimatorasymptotic distributionsbootstrap confidence intervalsBayes estimatorMCMC methods Acknowledgements The authors thank an anonymous referee for helpful comments and suggestions on an earlier version of this paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it