MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226224449 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2021.1135

Monte Carlo and Quasi–Monte Carlo Density Estimation via Conditioning

2022· article· en· W4226224449 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Approximation and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsMonte Carlo methodKernel density estimationMean squared errorStatisticsProbability density functionRandom variableRate of convergenceDensity estimationApplied mathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimating the unknown density from which a given independent sample originates is more difficult than estimating the mean in the sense that, for the best popular nonparametric density estimators, the mean integrated square error converges more slowly than at the canonical rate of [Formula: see text]. When the sample is generated from a simulation model and we have control over how this is done, we can do better. We examine an approach in which conditional Monte Carlo yields, under certain conditions, a random conditional density that is an unbiased estimator of the true density at any point. By averaging independent replications, we obtain a density estimator that converges at a faster rate than the usual ones. Moreover, combining this new type of estimator with randomized quasi–Monte Carlo to generate the samples typically brings a larger improvement on the error and convergence rate than for the usual estimators because the new estimator is smoother as a function of the underlying uniform random numbers. Summary of Contribution: Stochastic simulation is commonly used to estimate the mathematical expectation of some output random variable X together with a confidence interval for this expectation. But the simulations usually provide information to do much more, such as estimating the entire distribution (or density) of X. Histograms are routinely provided by standard simulation software, but they are very primitive density estimators. Kernel density estimators perform better, but they are trickier to use, have bias, and their mean square error converges more slowly than the canonical rate of O(1/n) with n independent samples. In this paper, we explain how to construct unbiased density estimators that converge at the canonical rate and even much faster when combined with randomized quasi–Monte Carlo. The key idea is to use conditional Monte Carlo to hide appropriate information and obtain a computable (random) conditional density, which acts (under certain conditions) as an unbiased density estimator. Moreover, this sample density is typically smoother than the classic density estimators as a function of the underlying uniform random numbers, so it can get along much better with randomized quasi–Monte Carlo methods. This offers an opportunity to further improve the O(1/n) rate. We observe rates near O(1/n 2 ) on some examples, and we give conditions under which this type of rate provably holds. The proposed approach is simple, easy to implement, and extremely effective, so it provides a significant addition to the stochastic simulation toolbox.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.268 · 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