MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288769965

Variance Reduction via Antithetic Markov Chains

2015· article· en· W2288769965 on OpenAlexaff
James Neufeld, Dale Schuurmans, Michael Bowling

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chainMarkov chain Monte CarloMarkov chain mixing timeVariable-order Markov modelVariance reductionSampling (signal processing)Importance samplingSequence (biology)Computer scienceMarkov modelEstimatorSlice samplingAlgorithmMonte Carlo methodMathematicsMathematical optimizationMarkov processMarkov propertyStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a Monte Carlo integration method, antithetic Markov chain sampling (AMCS), that incorporates local Markov transitions in an un-derlying importance sampler. Like sequential Monte Carlo sampling, the proposed method uses a sequence of Markov transitions to guide the sampling toward influential regions of the in-tegrand (modes). However, AMCS differs in the type of transitions that may be used, the num-ber of Markov chains, and the method of chain termination. In particular, from each point sam-pled from an initial proposal, AMCS collects a sequence of points by simulating two indepen-dent, but antithetic Markov chains, which are terminated by a sample-dependent stopping rule. Such an approach provides greater flexibility for targeting influential areas while eliminating the need to fix the length of the Markov chain a pri-ori. We show that the resulting estimator is un-biased and can reduce variance on peaked multi-modal integrands that challenge current methods. 1

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
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

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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207