Some Properties of the Family of Inverted Probability Loss Functions
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
The concept of inverting a normal probability density function in order to provide practitioners with realistic loss functions was introduced by Spiring [2]. Further developments saw the inversion of other density functions in an attempt to provide a variety of loss functions that could be used in depicting losses associated with deviations from a target (Spiring and Yeung [3]), Leung and Spiring [1]). The recent focus has been on the development and application of particular loss functions and their associated Risk functions. In this manuscript several properties associated with the entire family of Inverted Probability Loss Functions (IPLF) are investigated and outlined. As well, several IPLFs which possess interesting and unique properties associated with assessing, and depicting losses and loss functions are discussed. Several IPLFs will be considered, some plausible conjugate distributions presented and the general performance compared numerically under homogeneous conditions. Industrial examples demonstrating economic and monetary losses are included.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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