MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766659256 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v7n1p21

Characterization of the Bayesian Posterior Distribution in Terms of Self-information

2017· article· en· W2766659256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marco Dall’Aglio, Theodore P. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStatistical Mechanics and Entropy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosterior probabilityBayesian probabilityBayesian experimental designMathematicsMinimaxBayes factorPrior probabilityBayesian hierarchical modelingBayesian linear regressionBayesian statisticsBayes' theoremBayesian averageBayes estimatorBayesian inferenceApplied mathematicsStatisticsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that the classical Bayesian posterior arises naturally as the unique solution of different optimization problems, without the necessity of interpreting data as conditional probabilities and then using Bayes' Theorem. Here it is shown that the Bayesian posterior is also the unique minimax optimizer of the loss of self-information in combining the prior and the likelihood distributions, and is the unique proportional consolidation of the same distributions. These results, direct corollaries of recent results about conflations of probability distributions, further reinforce the use of Bayesian posteriors, and may help partially reconcile some of the differences between classical and Bayesian statistics.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0020.003
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicStatistical Mechanics and EntropyFrench-language works237,207