MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232332523 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804861

Decisions under Uncertainty

2005· book· en· W4232332523 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Jordaan

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2005
Typebook
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbability theoryApplied probabilityProbability distributionAsk priceBayesian probabilityProbability and statisticsComputer scienceDecision theoryFrequentist probabilityCore (optical fiber)Mathematical economicsImprecise probabilityPrinciple of maximum entropyManagement scienceOperations researchMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringStatisticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To better understand the core concepts of probability and to see how they affect real-world decisions about design and system performance, engineers and scientists might want to ask themselves the following questions: what exactly is meant by probability? What is the precise definition of the 100-year load and how is it calculated? What is an 'extremal' probability distribution? What is the Bayesian approach? How is utility defined? How do games fit into probability theory? What is entropy? How do I apply these ideas in risk analysis? Starting from the most basic assumptions, this 2005 book develops a coherent theory of probability and broadens it into applications in decision theory, design, and risk analysis. This book is written for engineers and scientists interested in probability and risk. It can be used by undergraduates, graduate students, or practicing engineers.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations88
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207