MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119549208 · doi:10.2307/3315981

Bayesian prediction of waiting times in stochastic models

2000· article· en· W2119549208 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ronald W. Butler, Aparna V. Huzurbazar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBayesian probabilityApplied mathematicsMathematicsMoment (physics)Inverse Gaussian distributionInversePrior probabilityGaussianDistribution (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationStatisticsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors show how saddlepoint techniques lead to highly accurate approximations for Bayesian predictive densities and cumulative distribution functions in stochastic model settings where the prior is tractable, but not necessarily the likelihood or the predictand distribution. They consider more specifically models involving predictions associated with waiting times for semi‐Markov processes whose distributions are indexed by an unknown parameter θ. Bayesian prediction for such processes when they are not stationary is also addressed and the inverse‐Gaussian based saddlepoint approximation of Wood, Booth & Butler (1993) is shown to accurately deal with the nonstationarity whereas the normal‐based Lugannani & Rice (1980) approximation cannot, Their methods are illustrated by predicting various waiting times associated withM/M/qandM/G/1queues. They also discuss modifications to the matrix renewal theory needed for computing the moment generating functions that are used in the saddlepoint methods.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations14
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207