Minimizing a general loss function in off‐line quality control
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 consider in the present paper the analysis of parameter designs in off‐line quality control. The main objective is to seek levels of the production factors that would minimize the expected loss. Unlike classical analyses which focus on the analysis of the mean and variance in minimizing a quadratic loss function, the proposed method is applicable to a general loss function. An appropriate transformation is first sought to eliminate the dependency of the variance on the mean (to achieve ‘separation’ in the terminology of Box). This is accomplished through a preliminary analysis using a recently proposed parametric heteroscedastic regression model. With the dependency of the variance on the mean eliminated, methods with established properties can be applied to estimate simultaneously the mean and the variance functions in the new metric. The expected loss function is then estimated and minimized based on a distributional free procedure using the empirical distribution of the standardized residuals. This alleviates the need for a full parametric model, which, if incorrectly specified, may lead to biased results. Although a transformation is employed as an intermediate step of analysis, the loss function is minimized in its original metric. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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