Mixture Model Analysis of Partially Rank‐Ordered Set Samples: Age Groups of Fish from Length‐Frequency Data
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 We present a novel methodology for estimating the parameters of a finite mixture model (FMM) based on partially rank‐ordered set (PROS) sampling and use it in a fishery application. A PROS sampling design first selects a simple random sample of fish and creates partially rank‐ordered judgement subsets by dividing units into subsets of prespecified sizes. The final measurements are then obtained from these partially ordered judgement subsets. The traditional expectation–maximization algorithm is not directly applicable for these observations. We propose a suitable expectation–maximization algorithm to estimate the parameters of the FMMs based on PROS samples. We also study the problem of classification of the PROS sample into the components of the FMM. We show that the maximum likelihood estimators based on PROS samples perform substantially better than their simple random sample counterparts even with small samples. The results are used to classify a fish population using the length‐frequency data.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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