Random forests for homogeneous and non-homogeneous Poisson processes with excess zeros
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a general hurdle methodology to model a response from a homogeneous or a non-homogeneous Poisson process with excess zeros, based on two forests. The first forest in the two parts model is used to estimate the probability of having a zero. The second forest is used to estimate the Poisson parameter(s), using only the observations with at least one event. To build the trees in the second forest, we propose specialized splitting criteria derived from the zero truncated homogeneous and non-homogeneous Poisson likelihood. The particular case of a homogeneous process is investigated in details to stress out the advantages of the proposed method over the existing ones. Simulation studies show that the proposed methods perform well in hurdle (zero-altered) and zero-inflated settings, for both homogeneous and non-homogeneous processes. We illustrate the use of the new method with real data on the demand for medical care by the elderly.
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.
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 | 0.014 | 0.191 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it