MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512501933 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v5n5p31

An Assessment of the Effects of Prior Distributions on the Bayesian Predictive Inference

2016· article· en· W2512501933 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Azizur Rahman, Junbin Gao, Catherine D’Este, S. Ejaz Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrior probabilityPredictive inferenceBayesian probabilityBayesian linear regressionInferenceBayesian inferenceStatistical inferenceRange (aeronautics)Frequentist inferenceBayesian statisticsStatisticsBayesian experimental designLinear regressionPrior informationEconometricsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive inference is one of the oldest methods of statistical analysis and it is based on observable data. Prior information plays an important role in the Bayesian methodology. Researchers in this field are often subjective to exercise noninformative prior. This study tests the effects of a range of prior distributions on the Bayesian predictive inference for different modelling situations such as linear regression models under normal and Student-t errors. Findings reveal that different choice of priors not only provide different prediction distributions of the future response(s) but also change the location and/or scale or shape parameters of the prediction distributions.

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)0.127
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.454
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1270.454
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.392 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207