MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149940508 · doi:10.1109/tit.2007.909168

Information conversion, effective samples, and parameter size

2007· article· en· W2149940508 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsPrinciple of maximum entropyKullback–Leibler divergenceSample size determinationMathematicsEntropy (arrow of time)Bayesian probabilityIndependence (probability theory)Posterior probabilitySample (material)StatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consider the relative entropy between a posterior density for a parameter given a sample and a second posterior density for the same parameter, based on a different model and a different data set. Then the relative entropy can be minimized over the second sample to get a virtual sample that would make the second posterior as close as possible to the first in an informational sense. If the first posterior is based on a dependent dataset and the second posterior uses an independence model, the effective inferential power of the dependent sample is transferred into the independent sample by the optimization. Examples of this optimization are presented for models with nuisance parameters, finite mixture models, and models for correlated data. Our approach is also used to choose the effective parameter size in a Bayesian hierarchical model.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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