A Complete Characterization of Projectivity for Statistical Relational Models
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
A generative probabilistic model for relational data consists of a family of probability distributions for relational structures over domains of different sizes. In most existing statistical relational learning (SRL) frameworks, these models are not projective in the sense that the marginal of the distribution for size-n structures on induced substructures of size k<n is equal to the given distribution for size-k structures. Projectivity is very beneficial in that it directly enables lifted inference and statistically consistent learning from sub-sampled relational structures. In earlier work some simple fragments of SRL languages have been identified that represent projective models. However, no complete characterization of, and representation framework for projective models has been given. In this paper we fill this gap: exploiting representation theorems for infinite exchangeable arrays we introduce a class of directed graphical latent variable models that precisely correspond to the class of projective relational models. As a by-product we also obtain a characterization for when a given distribution over size-k structures is the statistical frequency distribution of size-k substructures in much larger size-n structures. These results shed new light onto the old open problem of how to apply Halpern et al.'s ``random worlds approach'' for probabilistic inference to general relational signatures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it