MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399669520 · doi:10.3390/axioms13060401

Enhanced Real-Life Data Modeling with the Modified Burr III Odds Ratio–G Distribution

2024· article· en· W4399669520 on OpenAlexaff
Haochong Yang, Mingfang Huang, Xinyu Chen, Ziyan He, Shusen Pu

Bibliographic record

VenueAxioms · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of West Florida
KeywordsOddsQuantileOdds ratioStatisticsMathematicsDistribution (mathematics)Flexibility (engineering)InverseRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsLogistic regressionMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we introduce the modified Burr III Odds Ratio–G distribution, a novel statistical model that integrates the odds ratio concept with the foundational Burr III distribution. The spotlight of our investigation is cast on a key subclass within this innovative framework, designated as the Burr III Scaled Inverse Odds Ratio–G (B-SIOR-G) distribution. By effectively integrating the odds ratio with the Burr III distribution, this model enhances both flexibility and predictive accuracy. We delve into a thorough exploration of this distribution family’s mathematical and statistical properties, spanning hazard rate functions, quantile functions, moments, and additional features. Through rigorous simulation, we affirm the robustness of the B-SIOR-G model. The flexibility and practicality of the B-SIOR-G model are demonstrated through its application to four datasets, highlighting its enhanced efficacy over several well-established distributions.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designSimulation or modeling · Theoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Methods

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAxiomsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207