MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320582667 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2011.09053

Matrix compatibility and correlation mixture representation of generalized Gini's gamma

2020· preprint· en· W4320582667 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Takaaki Koike, Marius Hofert

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsConcordanceStatisticsBivariate analysisPearson product-moment correlation coefficientCorrelationCorrelation coefficientPairwise comparisonGeneralized gamma distributionRandom variableGini coefficientGamma distributionInequalityMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Representations of measures of concordance in terms of Pearson' s correlation coefficient are studied. All transforms of random variables are characterized such that the correlation coefficient of the transformed random variables is a measure of concordance. Next, Gini' s gamma is generalized and it is shown that the resulting generalized Gini' s gamma can be represented as a mixture of measures of concordance that are Pearson' s correlation coefficients of transformed random variables. As an application of this correlation mixture representation of generalized Gini' s gamma, lower and upper bounds of the compatible set of generalized Gini' s gamma, which is the collection of all possible square matrices whose entries are pairwise bivariate generalized Gini' s gammas, are derived.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.348
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.003 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207