MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W41273840

Utilizing general information theories for uncertainty quantification

2002· article· en· W41273840 on OpenAlexaff
J M Booker

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsJaneway Children's Health and Rehabilitation Centre
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryGeorge Washington UniversityU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsVaguenessComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Mathematical theoryUncertainty quantificationInformation theoryProbability theoryNoise (video)Complex systemDecision theoryTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceData miningAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learningFuzzy logicStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uncertainties enter into a complex problem from many sources: variability, errors, and lack of knowledge. A fundamental question arises in how to characterize the various kinds of uncertainty and then combine within a problem such as the verification and validation of a structural dynamics computer model, reliability of a dynamic system, or a complex decision problem. Because uncertainties are of different types (e.g., random noise, numerical error, vagueness of classification), it is difficult to quantify all of them within the constructs of a single mathematical theory, such as probability theory. Because different kinds of uncertainty occur within a complex modeling problem, linkages between these mathematical theories are necessary. A brief overview of some of these theories and their constituents under the label of Generalized lnforrnation Theory (GIT) is presented, and a brief decision example illustrates the importance of linking at least two such theories.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207