MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123187555 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v10n2p28

Application of Gibbs Sampling in Modelling the Utilization Rate of Raw Materials for Drug Coating

2021· article· en· W3123187555 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ge Song, Jiahui Yuan, Charlie Cheng-Jie Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGibbs samplingComputer scienceSampling (signal processing)Cluster analysisBayesian probabilityFeature selectionData miningCovariateStatisticsMachine learningMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMathematicsFilter (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug coating is one of the most important processes in the modern pharmaceutical industry. Improving the utilization rate of raw materials (URRM) in the drug coating process is thus important for cost saving and efficiency enhancement. There is little existing research on this topic in the literature of applied statistics. In this paper, motivated by a real dataset collected from a pharmaceutical company in China, we propose to use a novel predictive model that integrates a Bayesian framework with the Gibbs sampling algorithm to characterize the pattern of URRM. Based on certain prior distributional assumptions, the Gibbs sampling algorithm is then applied to sample the posterior distribution of the parameters to obtain more accurate and robust estimation results. By using the proposed method, the drugs can be properly separated into several categories with different patterns of URRM, and the pattern of each category can be properly recognized with selected covariates, which achieves the goals of clustering, variable selection, and regression simultaneously, and provides valuable insights into the improvement of the URRM for drug coating. Numerical studies show that the proposed method works well in practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207