Shape Constrained Kernel PDF and PMF Estimation
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
We consider shape constrained kernel-based probability density function (PDF) and probability mass function (PMF) estimation. Our approach is of widespread potential applicability and includes, separately or simultaneously, constraints on the PDF (PMF) function itself, its integral (sum), and derivatives (finite-differences) of any order. We also allow for pointwise upper and lower bounds (i.e., inequality constraints) on the PDF and PMF in addition to more popular equality constraints, and the approach handles a range of transformations of the PDF and PMF including, for example, logarithmic transformations (which allows for the imposition of log-concave or log-convex constraints that are popular with practitioners). Theoretical underpinnings for the procedures are provided. A simulation-based comparison of our proposed approach with those obtained using Grenander-type methods is favourable to our approach when the DGP is itself smooth. As far as we know, ours is also the only smooth framework that handles PDFs and PMFs in the presence of inequality bounds, equality constraints, and other popular constraints such as those mentioned above. An implementation in R exists that incorporates constraints such as monotonicity (both increasing and decreasing), convexity and concavity, and log-convexity and log-concavity, among others, while respecting finite-support boundaries via explicit use of boundary kernel functions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it