MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336764469 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v5n3p63

Properties of Transmetric Density Estimation

2016· article· en· W2336764469 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sigve Hovda

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKernel density estimationEstimatorMathematicsVariable kernel density estimationMultivariate kernel density estimationKernel (algebra)Mean squared errorDensity estimationGeneralizationApplied mathematicsNonparametric statisticsConvergence (economics)Parametric statisticsMathematical optimizationStatisticsKernel methodComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisCombinatoricsSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transmetric density estimation is a generalization of kernel density estimation that is proposed in Hovda(2014) and Hovda (2016), This framework involves the possibility of making assumptions on the kernel of the distribution to improve convergence orders and to reduce the number of dimensions in the graphical display. In this paper we show that several state-of-the-art nonparametric, semiparametric and even parametric methods are special cases of this formulation, meaning that there is a unified approach. Moreover, it is shown that parameters can be trained using unbiased cross-validation. When parameter estimation is included, the mean integrated squared error of the transmetric density estimator is lower than for the common kernel density estimator, when the number of dimensions is larger than two.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.151
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.151
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207