Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of loss estimation that involves for an observable $X \sim f_θ$ the choice of a first-stage estimator $\hatγ$ of $γ(θ)$, incurred loss $L=L(θ, \hatγ)$, and the choice of a second-stage estimator $\hat{L}$ of $L$. We consider both: (i) a sequential version where the first-stage estimate and loss are fixed and optimization is performed at the second-stage level, and (ii) a simultaneous version with a Rukhin-type loss function designed for the evaluation of $(\hatγ, \hat{L})$ as an estimator of $(γ, L)$. We explore various Bayesian solutions and provide minimax estimators for both situations (i) and (ii). The analysis is carried out for several probability models, including multivariate normal models $N_d(θ, σ^2 I_d)$ with both known and unknown $σ^2$, Gamma, univariate and multivariate Poisson, and negative binomial models, and relates to different choices of the first-stage and second-stage losses. The minimax findings are achieved by identifying least favourable of sequence of priors and depend critically on particular Bayesian solution properties, namely situations where the second-stage estimator $\hat{L}(x)$ is constant as a function of $x$.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".