Derivative of Reduced Cumulative Distribution Function and Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reduced cumulative distribution function (rCDF) is the maximal lower bound for the cumulative distribution function (CDF). It is equivalent to the inverse of the conditional value at risk (CVaR), or one minus the buffered probability of exceedance (bPOE). This paper introduces the reduced probability density function (rPDF), the derivative of rCDF. We first explore the relation between rCDF and other risk measures. Then we describe three means of calculating rPDF for a distribution, depending on what is known about the distribution. For functions with a closed-form formula for bPOE, we derive closed-form formulae for rPDF. Further, we describe formulae for rPDF based on a numerical bPOE when there is a closed-form formula for CVaR but no closed-form formula for bPOE. Finally, we give a method for numerically calculating rPDF for an empirical distribution, and compare the results with other methods for known distributions. We conducted a case study and used rPDF for sensitivity analysis and parameter estimation with a method similar to the maximum likelihood method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".