Default Priors for Bayesian and Frequentist Inference
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
Summary We investigate the choice of default priors for use with likelihood for Bayesian and frequentist inference. Such a prior is a density or relative density that weights an observed likelihood function, leading to the elimination of parameters that are not of interest and then a density-type assessment for a parameter of interest. For independent responses from a continuous model, we develop a prior for the full parameter that is closely linked to the original Bayes approach and provides an extension of the right invariant measure to general contexts. We then develop a modified prior that is targeted on a component parameter of interest and by targeting avoids the marginalization paradoxes of Dawid and co-workers. This modifies Jeffreys’s prior and provides extensions to the development of Welch and Peers. These two approaches are combined to explore priors for a vector parameter of interest in the presence of a vector nuisance parameter. Examples are given to illustrate the computation of the priors.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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