Comparison of statistical sampling methods with ScannerBit, the GAMBIT scanning module
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce ScannerBit , the statistics and sampling module of the public, open-source global fitting framework GAMBIT . ScannerBit provides a standardised interface to different sampling algorithms, enabling the use and comparison of multiple computational methods for inferring profile likelihoods, Bayesian posteriors, and other statistical quantities. The current version offers random, grid, raster, nested sampling, differential evolution, Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) and ensemble Monte Carlo samplers. We also announce the release of a new standalone differential evolution sampler, Diver , and describe its design, usage and interface to ScannerBit . We subject Diver and three other samplers (the nested sampler MultiNest , the MCMC GreAT , and the native ScannerBit implementation of the ensemble Monte Carlo algorithm T-Walk ) to a battery of statistical tests. For this we use a realistic physical likelihood function, based on the scalar singlet model of dark matter. We examine the performance of each sampler as a function of its adjustable settings, and the dimensionality of the sampling problem. We evaluate performance on four metrics: optimality of the best fit found, completeness in exploring the best-fit region, number of likelihood evaluations, and total runtime. For Bayesian posterior estimation at high resolution, T-Walk provides the most accurate and timely mapping of the full parameter space. For profile likelihood analysis in less than about ten dimensions, we find that Diver and MultiNest score similarly in terms of best fit and speed, outperforming GreAT and T-Walk ; in ten or more dimensions, Diver substantially outperforms the other three samplers on all metrics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.008 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".