MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094210543 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11573

Local structure graph models with higher‐order dependence

2020· article· en· W3094210543 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emily Casleton, Daniel J. Nordman, Mark S. Kaiser

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSandia National LaboratoriesU.S. Department of EnergyNational Nuclear Security AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsExponential random graph modelsRandom graphMarginal distributionMarkov chainGraphCovariateMathematicsMixed graphExponential familyRandom fieldMarkov random fieldRandom variableStatistical physicsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsDiscrete mathematicsEconometricsStatisticsLine graphArtificial intelligenceVoltage graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Local structure graph models (LSGMs) describe random graphs and networks as a Markov random field (MRF)—each graph edge has a specified conditional distribution dependent on explicit neighbourhoods of other graph edges. Centred parameterizations of LSGMs allow for direct control and interpretation of parameters for large‐ and small‐scale structures (e.g., marginal means vs. dependence). We extend this parameterization to account for triples of dependent edges and illustrate the importance of centred parameterizations for incorporating covariates and interpreting parameters. Using a MRF framework, common exponential random graph models are also shown to induce conditional distributions without centred parameterizations and thereby have undesirable features. This work attempts to advance graph models through conditional model specifications with modern parameterizations, covariates and higher‐order dependencies.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicComplex Network Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207