MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134713051 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2010.05.080640

Accurate computation of the MGF of the lognormal distribution and its application to sum of lognormals

2010· article· en· W2134713051 on OpenAlexaff
Chintha Tellambura, Damith Senaratne

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLog-normal distributionMathematicsFunction (biology)Expression (computer science)Applied mathematicsCumulative distribution functionSaddle pointMethod of steepest descentConvergence (economics)AlgorithmDistribution (mathematics)Moment (physics)Mathematical optimizationMathematical analysisProbability density functionComputer scienceStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sums of lognormal random variables (RVs) are of wide interest in wireless communications and other areas of science and engineering. Since the distribution of lognormal sums is not log-normal and does not have a closed-form analytical expression, many approximations and bounds have been developed. This paper develops two computational methods for the moment generating function (MGF) or the characteristic function (CHF) of a single lognormal RV. The first method uses classical complex integration techniques based on steepest-descent integration. The saddle point of the integrand is explicitly expressed by the Lambert function. The steepest-descent (optimal) contour and two closely-related closed-form contours are derived. A simple integration rule (e.g., the midpoint rule) along any of these contours computes the MGF/CHF with high accuracy. The second approach uses a variation on the trapezoidal rule due to Ooura and Mori. Importantly, the cumulative distribution function of lognormal sums is derived as an alternating series and convergence acceleration via the Epsilon algorithm is used to reduce, in some cases, the computational load by a factor of 106! Overall, accuracy levels of 13 to 15 significant digits are readily achievable.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations39
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207