Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. A number of approaches towards the kernel estimation of copula have appeared in the literature. Most existing approaches use a manifestation of the copula that requires kernel density estimation of bounded variates lying on a d-dimensional unit hypercube. This gives rise to a number of issues as it requires special treatment of the boundary and possible modifications to bandwidth selection routines, among others. Furthermore, existing kernel-based approaches are restricted to continuous date types only, though there is a growing interest in copula estimation with discrete marginals (see e.g. Smith & Khaled (2012) for a Bayesian approach). We demonstrate that using a simple inversion method (cf Nelsen (2006), Fermanian & Scaillet (2003)) can sidestep boundary issues while admitting mixed data types directly thereby extending the reach of kernel copula estimators. Bandwidth selection proceeds by the recently proposed method of Li & Racine (2013). Furthermore, there is no curse-of-dimensionality for the kernel-based copula estimator (though there is for the copula density estimator, as is the case for existing kernel copula density methods). 1. Background Copulas are functions that “couple ” multivariate distribution functions to their one-dimensional
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".