Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the first-order probabilistic programming language introduced by Staton et al. (2016), but with an additional language construct, $\mathbf{stat}$, that, like the fixpoint operator of Atkinson et al. (2018), converts the description of the Markov kernel of an ergodic Markov chain into a sample from its unique stationary distribution. Up to minor changes in how certain error conditions are handled, we show that $\mathbf{norm}$ and $\mathbf{score}$ are eliminable from the extended language, in the sense of Felleisen (1991). We do so by giving an explicit program transformation and proof of correctness. In fact, our program transformation implements a Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm, in the spirit of the "Trace-MH" algorithm of Wingate et al. (2011) and Goodman et al. (2008), but less sophisticated to enable analysis. We then explore the problem of approximately implementing the semantics of the language with potentially nested $\mathbf{stat}$ expressions, in a language without $\mathbf{stat}$. For a single $\mathbf{stat}$ term, the error introduced by the finite unrolling proposed by Atkinson et al. (2018) vanishes only asymptotically. In the general case, no guarantees exist. Under uniform ergodicity assumptions, we are able to give quantitative error bounds and convergence results for the approximate implementation of the extended first-order language.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".