MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194799463 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v5n1p51

Surprising Convergence Properties of Some Simple Gibbs Samplers under Various Scans

2015· article· en· W2194799463 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Simple (philosophy)Gibbs samplingMathematicsApplied mathematicsSimple random sampleStatistical physicsMathematical optimizationStatisticsBayesian probabilityPhysicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the convergence properties of some simple Gibbs sampler examples under various scans. We find some surprising results, including Gibbs samplers where deterministic-scan is much more efficient than random-scan, and other samplers where the opposite is true. We also present an example where the convergence takes precisely the same time with any fixed deterministic scan, but modifying the scan in any way leads to significantly slower convergence.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.220 · 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