MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2555286646 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11304

Gaussian process emulators for spatial individual‐level models of infectious disease

2016· article· en· W2555286646 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Gyanendra Pokharel, Rob Deardon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloLikelihood functionComputer scienceGaussian processBayesian inferenceStatistical inferenceInferenceBayesian probabilityAlgorithmContext (archaeology)Data miningGaussianMachine learningArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsEstimation theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Statistical inference for spatial models of infectious disease spread is often very computationally expensive. These models are generally fitted in a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) framework, which requires multiple iterations of the computationally cumbersome likelihood function. We here propose a method of inference based on so‐called emulation techniques. Once again the method is set in a Bayesian MCMC context, but avoids calculation of the computationally expensive likelihood function by replacing it with a Gaussian process approximation of the likelihood function built from simulated data. We show that such a method can be used to infer the model parameters and underlying characteristics of the spatial disease system, and this can be done in a computationally efficient manner. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 44: 480–501; 2016 © 2016 Statistical Society of Canada

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
grokno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
opusno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinghigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Labeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207