MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317830835 · doi:10.1007/s00362-023-01394-4

On some problems of Bayesian region construction with guaranteed coverages

2023· article· en· W4317830835 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Evans, Miaoshiqi Liu, Michael Moon, Sabrina Sixta, Siyi Wei, Siyue Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Papers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBayesian probabilityAlgorithmComputer scienceStatisticsA priori and a posterioriMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The general problem of constructing regions that have a guaranteed coverage probability for an arbitrary parameter of interest $$\psi \in \Psi $$ ψ ∈ Ψ is considered. The regions developed are Bayesian in nature and the coverage probabilities can be considered as Bayesian confidences with respect to the model obtained by integrating out the nuisance parameters using the conditional prior given $$\psi .$$ ψ . Both the prior coverage probability and the prior probability of covering a false value (the accuracy) can be controlled by setting the sample size. These coverage probabilities are considered as a priori figures of merit concerning the reliability of a study while the inferences quoted are Bayesian. Several problems are considered where obtaining confidence regions with desirable properties have proven difficult to obtain. For example, it is shown that the approach discussed never leads to improper regions which has proven to be an issue for some confidence regions.

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)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.258
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.258
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical PapersSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207