MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311998838 · doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2022.126951

Miscellaneous results related to the Gaussian product inequality conjecture for the joint distribution of traces of Wishart matrices

2022· article· en· W4311998838 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian Genest, Frédéric Ouimet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCentre de Recherches MathématiquesSimons Foundation
KeywordsWishart distributionMathematicsInverse-Wishart distributionConjectureKronecker productDistribution (mathematics)Multivariate normal distributionGaussianProduct (mathematics)DiagonalTRACE (psycholinguistics)Complex normal distributionCombinatoricsPure mathematicsMultivariate statisticsMathematical analysisKronecker deltaStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note reports partial results related to the Gaussian product inequality (GPI) conjecture for the joint distribution of traces of Wishart matrices. In particular, several GPI-related results from Wei [32] and Liu et al. [15] are extended in two ways: by replacing the power functions with more general classes of functions, and by replacing the usual Gaussian and multivariate gamma distributional assumptions by the more general trace-Wishart distribution assumption. These findings suggest that a Kronecker product form of the GPI holds for diagonal blocks of any Wishart distribution.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.014
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207