MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964022095 · doi:10.1111/rssc.12321

Careful Prior Specification Avoids Incautious Inference for Log-Gaussian Cox Point Processes

2018· article· en· W2964022095 on OpenAlexaff
Sigrunn H. S⊘rbye, Janine Illian, Daniel Simpson, David F. R. P. Burslem, Håvard Rue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyOffice of International Science and EngineeringSmithsonian Tropical Research InstituteSmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHyperparameterPoint processHyperparameter optimizationInferenceGaussian processMathematicsComputer scienceCovariateGaussianAlgorithmStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Hyperprior specifications for random fields in spatial point process modelling can have a major influence on the results. In fitting log-Gaussian Cox processes to rainforest tree species, we consider a reparameterized model combining a spatially structured and an unstructured random field into a single component. This component has one hyperparameter accounting for marginal variance, whereas an additional hyperparameter governs the fraction of the variance that is explained by the spatially structured effect. This facilitates interpretation of the hyperparameters, and significance of covariates is studied for a range of hyperprior specifications. Appropriate scaling makes the analysis invariant to grid resolution.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations31
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics)Same topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207