MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947185180 · doi:10.5203/pmuser.201841670

Construction of A-optimal Designs for Linear Models

2018· article· en· W2947185180 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorMathematical optimizationOptimal designConvergence (economics)Variance (accounting)Context (archaeology)MathematicsFunction (biology)Optimality criterionEfficiencyDesign of experimentsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For estimating parameters of a statistical model, it is important to minimize the variances of the estimators. Efficiency of an estimator increases as its variance becomes smaller. Sometimes instead of minimizing the variances of the individual parameters, it is important to minimize the total or average variance of all the parameter estimators. This refers to A-optimality in the context of optimal experimental design. Motivated by this fact, we construct A-optimal designs for some regression models using a class of algorithms, indexed by a function which depends on the derivatives of the criterion function. We also develop strategies for constructing A-optimal designs and investigate techniques for improving convergence rates by using the properties of the directional derivatives of the criterion function. We explored the design construction through some examples including one practical problem arising in chemistry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.395
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.110 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Experimental Design MethodsFrench-language works237,207