Bayesian computation for Log-Gaussian Cox processes: a comparative analysis of methods
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 Log-Gaussian Cox Process is a commonly used model for the analysis of spatial point pattern data. Fitting this model is difficult because of its doubly-stochastic property, i.e., it is an hierarchical combination of a Poisson process at the first level and a Gaussian Process at the second level. Various methods have been proposed to estimate such a process, including traditional likelihood-based approaches as well as Bayesian methods. We focus here on Bayesian methods and several approaches that have been considered for model fitting within this framework, including Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, the Integrated nested Laplace approximation, and Variational Bayes. We consider these approaches and make comparisons with respect to statistical and computational efficiency. These comparisons are made through several simulation studies as well as through two applications, the first examining ecological data and the second involving neuroimaging data.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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