MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386475977 · doi:10.1080/01621459.2023.2235059

Poisson-FOCuS: An Efficient Online Method for Detecting Count Bursts with Application to Gamma Ray Burst Detection

2023· article· en· W4386475977 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kes Ward, Giuseppe Dilillo, Idris A. Eckley, Paul Fearnhead

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGamma-ray bursts and supernovae
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilInstitut sur la Nutrition et les Aliments Fonctionnels
KeywordsPoisson distributionFocus (optics)Sliding window protocolFermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeComputer scienceGridWindow (computing)PhotonEnergy (signal processing)AlgorithmDetectorGamma-ray burstReal-time computingPhysicsOpticsMathematicsTelecommunicationsAstrophysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gamma ray bursts are flashes of light from distant, new-born black holes. CubeSats that monitor high-energy photons across different energy bands are used to detect these bursts. There is a need for computationally efficient algorithms, able to run using the limited computational resource onboard a CubeSats, that can detect when gamma ray bursts occur. Current algorithms are based on monitoring photon counts across a grid of different sizes of time window. We propose a new method, which extends the recently proposed FOCuS approach for online change detection to Poisson data. Our method is mathematically equivalent to searching over all possible window sizes, but at half the computational cost of the current grid-based methods. We demonstrate the additional power of our approach using simulations and data drawn from the Fermi gamma ray burst monitor archive. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Statistical AssociationSame topicGamma-ray bursts and supernovaeFrench-language works237,207