MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171953104

Location Reparameterization and Default Priors for Statistical Analysis

2002· article· en· W2171953104 on OpenAlexaff
D. A. S. Fraser, Grace Y. Yi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Iranian Statistical Society · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrior probabilityFrequentist inferenceMathematicsBayesian probabilityStatistical inferenceBayesian inferenceApplied mathematicsEconometricsStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops default priors for Bayesian analysis that reproduce familiar frequentist and Bayesian analyses for models that are exponential or location. For the vector parameter case there is an information adjustment that avoids the Bayesian marginaliza- tion paradoxes and properly targets the prior on the parameter of interest thus adjusting for any complicating nonlinearity; the details of this vector Bayesian issue will be investigated in detail elsewhere. As in wide generality a statistical model has an inference component structure that is approximately exponential or approximately loca- tion to third order, this provides general default prior procedures that can be described as reweighting likelihood in accord with a Jereys' prior based on observed information. Two asymptotic models, that have variable and parameter of the same dimension and agree at a data point to first derivative con- ditional on an approximate ancillary, produce the same p-values to third order for inferences concerning scalar interest parameters. With

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Iranian Statistical SocietySame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207