MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386373863 · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.1516

PyMC: a modern, and comprehensive probabilistic programming framework in Python

2023· article· en· W4386373863 on OpenAlexaff
Oriol Abril, Virgile Andreani, Colin Carroll, Larry Dong, Christopher Fonnesbeck, Maxim Kochurov, Ravin Kumar, Junpeng Lao, Christian C. Luhmann, Osvaldo A. Martin, Michael Osthege, Ricardo Vieira, Thomas V. Wiecki, Robert Zinkov

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ Computer Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePython (programming language)Probabilistic logicProgramming languageSyntaxTheoretical computer scienceStatistical modelVariety (cybernetics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PyMC is a probabilistic programming library for Python that provides tools for constructing and fitting Bayesian models. It offers an intuitive, readable syntax that is close to the natural syntax statisticians use to describe models. PyMC leverages the symbolic computation library PyTensor, allowing it to be compiled into a variety of computational backends, such as C, JAX, and Numba, which in turn offer access to different computational architectures including CPU, GPU, and TPU. Being a general modeling framework, PyMC supports a variety of models including generalized hierarchical linear regression and classification, time series, ordinary differential equations (ODEs), and non-parametric models such as Gaussian processes (GPs). We demonstrate PyMC's versatility and ease of use with examples spanning a range of common statistical models. Additionally, we discuss the positive role of PyMC in the development of the open-source ecosystem for probabilistic programming.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.016

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations792
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJ Computer ScienceSame topicGaussian Processes and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207