MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978725510

UMP invariance in adaptive detection: kernels that preserve monotone likelihood ratio

2003· article· en· W2978725510 on OpenAlexaff
S. Kraut, Louis L. Scharf, Ronald W. Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Signal Processing Workshop on Statistical Signal Processing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsMonotone polygonInvariant (physics)StatisticEstimatorSufficient statisticTest statisticApplied mathematicsNoise powerLikelihood-ratio testStatisticsStatistical hypothesis testingPower (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the question of optimality for the adaptive coherence estimator (ACE), which is an adaptive detection statistic for the problem in which noise in the training data is not constrained to have same power level as noise in the test data. Having previously shown that ACE is a maximal invariant statistic, we complete a proof that a threshold test on ACE is uniformly-most-powerful (UMP) invariant. This requires a second result, that the statistic possesses a monotone likelihood ratio (MLR). We establish the MLR property by relating it to the property of the density being a positive kernel. By repeatedly applying a basic composition formula for such kernels, we show that the density for ACE is totally positive. Thus the density has MLR, and a simple threshold test on ACE has the strict optimality property of being UMP-invariant.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Signal Processing Workshop on Statistical Signal ProcessingSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207