MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211211011

Monge–Kantorovich depth, quantiles, ranks and signs

2017· article· en· W4211211011 on OpenAlexaff
Alfred Galichon, Marc Hallin, Marc Henry, Victor Chernozhukov

Bibliographic record

VenueDSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicPoint processes and geometric inequalities
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCenter for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on Organizations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantileMathematicsConsistency (knowledge bases)Regular polygonElliptical distributionMultivariate statisticsDistribution (mathematics)PopulationStatisticsMultivariate normal distributionMathematical analysisGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose new concepts of statistical depth, multivariate quantiles, vector quantiles and ranks, ranks and signs, based on canonical transportation maps between a distribution of interest on Rd and a reference distribution on the d-dimensional unit ball. The new depth concept, called Monge- Kantorovich depth, specializes to halfspace depth for d = 1 and in the case of spherical distributions, but for more general distributions, differs from the latter in the ability for its contours to account for non-convex features of the distribution of interest. We propose empirical counterparts to the population versions of those Monge-Kantorovich depth contours, quantiles, ranks, signs and vector quantiles and ranks, and show their consistency by establishing a uniform convergence property for empirical (forward and reverse) transport maps, which is the main theoretical result of this paper.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
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

Citations154
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)Same topicPoint processes and geometric inequalitiesFrench-language works237,207