MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318485266 · doi:10.3390/math11030635

Statistics of Weibull Record-Breaking Events

2023· article· en· W4318485266 on OpenAlexafffund
R. Shcherbakov

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWeibull distributionIndependent and identically distributed random variablesOrder statisticStatisticsConvolution (computer science)MathematicsStatistical physicsMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceRandom variablePhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The statistics of record-breaking events plays an important role in the analysis of natural physical systems. It can provide an additional insight into the mechanisms and the occurrence of extreme events. In this work, the statistical aspects of the record-breaking events drawn from the Weibull distribution are considered and analyzed in detail. It is assumed that the underlying sequences of events are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.). Several statistical measures of record-breaking events are analyzed. Exact analytical expressions are derived for the statistics of records. Particularly, the distributions of record magnitudes and the corresponding average magnitudes of records in case of Weibull distributed events are derived exactly for any specific record order and time step. In addition, a convolution operation is used to derive a recursive formula for the distribution of times of the occurrence of records. The analytical results are compared with the Monte Carlo simulations and their validity is confirmed. The numerical simulations also reveal that the finite-size effects strongly affect the statistics of records and need to be considered during the analysis of numerical experiments or empirical data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.186 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207