MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391944190 · doi:10.1214/23-sts907

Past, Present and Future of Software for Bayesian Inference

2024· article· en· W4391944190 on OpenAlexaff
Erik Štrumbelj, Alexandre Bouchard‐Côté, Jukka Corander, Andrew Gelman, Håvard Rue, Lawrence M. Murray, Henri Pesonen, Martyn Plummer, Aki Vehtari

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS
KeywordsComputer scienceInferenceBayesian inferenceBayesian probabilitySoftwareArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEconometricsData scienceData miningMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Software tools for Bayesian inference have undergone rapid evolution in the past three decades, following popularisation of the first generation MCMC-sampler implementations. More recently, exponential growth in the number of users has been stimulated both by the active development of new packages by the machine learning community and popularity of specialist software for particular applications. This review aims to summarize the most popular software and provide a useful map for a reader to navigate the world of Bayesian computation. We anticipate a vigorous continued development of algorithms and corresponding software in multiple research fields, such as probabilistic programming, likelihood-free inference and Bayesian neural networks, which will further broaden the possibilities for employing the Bayesian paradigm in exciting applications.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0090.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.014
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.018

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical ScienceSame topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207