Backward Simulation of Correlated Negative Binomial L'evy Process Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies on correlated Poisson processes show that the backward simulation methods are computationally efficient, and incorporate flexible and extremal correlation structures in a multivariate risk system. These methods rely on the fact that the past arrival times of a Poisson process given the number of events over a time interval, [0; T], are the order statistics of uniform random variables on [0; T]. In this paper, we discuss an extension of the backward methods to a correlated negative binomial L´evy process which is an appealing model for over-dispersed count data such as operational losses. To obtain the conditional uniformity for the negative binomial L´evy process, we consider a particular setting in which the time interval is partitioned into equally spaced sub-intervals with unit length and the terminal time T is set to be the number of sub-intervals. Under this setting, the resulting joint probability of the increment series, conditional on the number of events over [0; T], say l, is uniform for any points in the support of a [T; l]-simplex lattice. Based on this result, we establish a backward simulation method similar to that of Poisson process. Both the conditional independence and conditional dependence cases are discussed with illustrations of the corresponding time correlation patterns.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".