Modeling and optimization for multiple correlated responses with distribution variability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In production design processes, multiple correlated responses with different distributions are often encountered. The existing literature usually assumes that they follow normal distributions for computational convenience, and then analyzes these responses using traditional parametric methods. A few research papers assume that they follow the same type of distribution, such as the t-distribution, and then use a multivariate joint distribution to deal with the correlation. However, these methods give a poor approximation to the actual problem and may lead to the recommended settings that yield substandard products. In this article, we propose a new method for the robust parameter design that can solve the above problems. Specifically, a semiparametric model is used to estimate the margins, and then a joint distribution function is constructed using a multivariate copula function. Finally, the probability that the responses meet the specifications simultaneously is used to obtain the optimal settings. The advantages of the proposed method lie in the consideration of multiple correlation patterns among responses, the absence of restrictions on the response distributions, and the use of nonparametric smoothing to reduce the risk of model misspecification. The results of the case study and the simulation study validate the effectiveness of the proposed method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".