MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169535623 · doi:10.1111/risa.13758

Cascade Sensitivity Measures

2021· article· en· W3169535623 on OpenAlexafffund
Silvana M. Pesenti, Pietro Millossovich, Andreas Tsanakas

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)CascadeMeasure (data warehouse)Computer scienceDerivative (finance)Risk measureMultivariate random variableEconometricsRandom variableMathematicsStatisticsData miningEngineeringElectronic engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In risk analysis, sensitivity measures quantify the extent to which the probability distribution of a model output is affected by changes (stresses) in individual random input factors. For input factors that are statistically dependent, we argue that a stress on one input should also precipitate stresses in other input factors. We introduce a novel sensitivity measure, termed cascade sensitivity, defined as a derivative of a risk measure applied on the output, in the direction of an input factor. The derivative is taken after suitably transforming the random vector of inputs, thus explicitly capturing the direct impact of the stressed input factor, as well as indirect effects via other inputs. Furthermore, alternative representations of the cascade sensitivity measure are derived, allowing us to address practical issues, such as incomplete specification of the model and high computational costs. The applicability of the methodology is illustrated through the analysis of a commercially used insurance risk model.

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)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207