MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140803050 · doi:10.5267/j.ijiec.2013.03.003

Modeling quality control data using mixture of parametrical distributions

2013· article· en· W2140803050 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Control (management)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)EconometricsEnvironmental scienceStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a Bayesian analysis of a data set selected from a Brazilian food company. This data set represents the times taken for different quality control analysts to test manufactured products arriving at the company's quality control department. The samples selected from each batch contain mixtures of different products, which may be submitted to quality testing taking different times. From preliminary analysis of the data, it was observed that the histograms presented two clusters, indicating a mixture of distributions. A mixture of parametrical distributions was thus assumed in the presence of a covariate in order to analyze the data set and to establish standards to be used by the company for the times taken by the analysts. Inferences and predictions are obtained using a Bayesian approach with standard existing Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.245 · 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