MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103104637 · doi:10.1081/sta-120029833

Bayesian Minimally Supported <i>D</i> -Optimal Designs for an Exponential Regression Model

2004· article· en· W2103104637 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhide Fang, Douglas P. Wiens

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsHeteroscedasticityApplied mathematicsPrior probabilityOptimal designExponential functionBayesian probabilityNonlinear regressionPolynomial regressionPolynomialBayesian information criterionVariance (accounting)Regression analysisBayesian linear regressionVariance functionFunction (biology)RegressionMathematical optimizationStatisticsBayesian inferenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem of obtaining static (i.e., nonsequential), approximate optimal designs for a nonlinear regression model with response E[Y|x] = exp(θ0 + θ1 x + · + θ k x k ). The problem can be transformed to the design problem for a heteroscedastic polynomial regression model, where the variance function is of an exponential form with unknown parameters. Under the assumption that sufficient prior information about these parameters is available, minimally supported Bayesian D-optimal designs are obtained. A general procedure for constructing such designs is provided; as well the analytic forms of these designs are derived for some special priors. The theory of canonical moments and the theory of continued fractions are applied for these purposes.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicOptimal Experimental Design MethodsFrench-language works237,207