MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950748145 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1504.07336

Information content of partially rank-ordered set samples

2015· preprint· en· W2950748145 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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicFuzzy Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaFields Institute for Research in Mathematical SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple random sampleSampling (signal processing)StatisticsRanking (information retrieval)MathematicsEntropy (arrow of time)Rank (graph theory)Stratified samplingSampling designPopulationSystematic samplingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Partially rank-ordered set (PROS) sampling is a generalization of ranked set sampling in which rankers are not required to fully rank the sampling units in each set, hence having more flexibility to perform the necessary judgemental ranking process. The PROS sampling has a wide range of applications in different fields ranging from environmental and ecological studies to medical research and it has been shown to be superior over ranked set sampling and simple random sampling for estimating the population mean. In this paper, we study the Fisher information content and uncertainty structure of the PROS samples and compare them with those of simple random sample (SRS) and ranked set sample (RSS) counterparts of the same size from the underlying population. We study the uncertainty structure in terms of the Shannon entropy, Renyi entropy and Kullback-Leibler (KL) discrimination measures. Several examples including the FI of PROS samples from the location-scale family of distributions as well as a regression model are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.032 · 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