LRP2020: Astrostatistics in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(Abridged from Executive Summary) This white paper focuses on the interdisciplinary fields of astrostatistics and astroinformatics, in which modern statistical and computational methods are applied to and developed for astronomical data. Astrostatistics and astroinformatics have grown dramatically in the past ten years, with international organizations, societies, conferences, workshops, and summer schools becoming the norm. Canada's formal role in astrostatistics and astroinformatics has been relatively limited, but there is a great opportunity and necessity for growth in this area. We conducted a survey of astronomers in Canada to gain information on the training mechanisms through which we learn statistical methods and to identify areas for improvement. In general, the results of our survey indicate that while astronomers see statistical methods as critically important for their research, they lack focused training in this area and wish they had received more formal training during all stages of education and professional development. These findings inform our recommendations for the LRP2020 on how to increase interdisciplinary connections between astronomy and statistics at the institutional, national, and international levels over the next ten years. We recommend specific, actionable ways to increase these connections, and discuss how interdisciplinary work can benefit not only research but also astronomy's role in training Highly Qualified Personnel (HQP) in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.138 | 0.090 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".