MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991299394 · doi:10.3150/19-bej1130

Construction results for strong orthogonal arrays of strength three

2019· article· en· W2991299394 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBernoulli · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOrthogonal arrayMathematicsSpace (punctuation)Class (philosophy)AlgorithmComputer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligenceTaguchi methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strong orthogonal arrays were recently introduced as a class of space-filling designs for computer experiments. The most attractive are those of strength three for their economical run sizes. Although the existence of strong orthogonal arrays of strength three has been completely characterized, the construction of these arrays has not been explored. In this paper, we provide a systematic and comprehensive study on the construction of these arrays, with the aim at better space-filling properties. Besides various characterizing results, three families of strength-three strong orthogonal arrays are presented. One of these families deserves special mention, as the arrays in this family enjoy almost all of the space-filling properties of strength-four strong orthogonal arrays, and do so with much more economical run sizes than the latter. The theory of maximal designs and their doubling constructions plays a crucial role in many of theoretical developments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.243 · 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