A Bayesian method for estimating prevalence in the presence of a hidden sub‐population
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
When estimating the prevalence of a binary trait in a population, the presence of a hidden sub-population that cannot be sampled will lead to nonidentifiability and potentially biased estimation. We propose a Bayesian model of trait prevalence for a weighted sample from the non-hidden portion of the population, by modeling the relationship between prevalence and sampling probability. We studied the behavior of the posterior distribution on population prevalence, with the large-sample limits of posterior distributions obtained in simple analytical forms that give intuitively expected properties. We performed MCMC simulations on finite samples to evaluate the effectiveness of statistical learning. We applied the model and the results to two illustrative datasets arising from weighted sampling. Our work confirms that sensible results can be obtained using Bayesian analysis, despite the nonidentifiability in this situation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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