Uncertainty Quantification in Case of Imperfect Models: A Non‐Bayesian Approach
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
Abstract The starting point in uncertainty quantification is a stochastic model, which is fitted to a technical system in a suitable way, and prediction of uncertainty is carried out within this stochastic model. In any application, such a model will not be perfect, so any uncertainty quantification from such a model has to take into account the inadequacy of the model. In this paper, we rigorously show how the observed data of the technical system can be used to build a conservative non‐asymptotic confidence interval on quantiles related to experiments with the technical system. The construction of this confidence interval is based on concentration inequalities and order statistics. An asymptotic bound on the length of this confidence interval is presented. Here we assume that engineers use more and more of their knowledge to build models with order of errors bounded by . The results are illustrated by applying the newly proposed approach to real and simulated 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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