MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280625434 · doi:10.1017/s0269964822000122

On approximation of the analytic fixed finite time large <i>t</i> probability distributions in an extreme renewal process with no-mean inter-renewals

2022· article· en· W4280625434 on OpenAlexafffund
Percy H. Brill, Mei Ling Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueProbability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsRenewal theoryLimitingProbability density functionPareto principleApplied mathematicsComputationStatistical physicsStatisticsPhysicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider an extreme renewal process with no-mean heavy-tailed Pareto(II) inter-renewals and shape parameter $\alpha$ where $0\lt\alpha \leq 1$ . Two steps are required to derive integral expressions for the analytic probability density functions (pdfs) of the fixed finite time $t$ excess, age, and total life, and require extensive computations. Step 1 creates and solves a Volterra integral equation of the second kind for the limiting pdf of a basic underlying regenerative process defined in the text, which is used for all three fixed finite time $t$ pdfs. Step 2 builds the aforementioned integral expressions based on the limiting pdf in the basic underlying regenerative process. The limiting pdfs of the fixed finite time $t$ pdfs as $t\rightarrow \infty$ do not exist. To reasonably observe the large $t$ pdfs in the extreme renewal process, we approximate them using the limiting pdfs having simple well-known formulas, in a companion renewal process where inter-renewals are right-truncated Pareto(II) variates with finite mean; this does not involve any computations. The distance between the approximating limiting pdfs and the analytic fixed finite time large $t$ pdfs is given by an $L_{1}$ metric taking values in $(0,1)$ , where “near $0$ ” means “close” and “near $1$ ” means “far”.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbability in the Engineering and Informational SciencesSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207