MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154533874 · doi:10.3390/stats4020021

A Flexible Multivariate Distribution for Correlated Count Data

2021· article· en· W3154533874 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly F. Sellers, Tong Li, Yixuan Wu, N. Balakrishnan

Bibliographic record

VenueStats · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCount dataMultivariate statisticsNegative binomial distributionPoisson distributionStatisticsDispersion (optics)MathematicsMultivariate analysis of varianceMultivariate normal distributionMultivariate analysisOverdispersionComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate count data are often modeled via a multivariate Poisson distribution, but it contains an underlying, constraining assumption of data equi-dispersion (where its variance equals its mean). Real data are oftentimes over-dispersed and, as such, consider various advancements of a negative binomial structure. While data over-dispersion is more prevalent than under-dispersion in real data, however, examples containing under-dispersed data are surfacing with greater frequency. Thus, there is a demonstrated need for a flexible model that can accommodate both data types. We develop a multivariate Conway–Maxwell–Poisson (MCMP) distribution to serve as a flexible alternative for correlated count data that contain data dispersion. This structure contains the multivariate Poisson, multivariate geometric, and the multivariate Bernoulli distributions as special cases, and serves as a bridge distribution across these three classical models to address other levels of over- or under-dispersion. In this work, we not only derive the distributional form and statistical properties of this model, but we further address parameter estimation, establish informative hypothesis tests to detect statistically significant data dispersion and aid in model parsimony, and illustrate the distribution’s flexibility through several simulated and real-world data examples. These examples demonstrate that the MCMP distribution performs on par with the multivariate negative binomial distribution for over-dispersed data, and proves particularly beneficial in effectively representing under-dispersed data. Thus, the MCMP distribution offers an effective, unifying framework for modeling over- or under-dispersed multivariate correlated count data that do not necessarily adhere to Poisson assumptions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatsSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207