K-contact distance for noisy nonhomogeneous spatial point data with application to repeating fast radio burst sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces an approach to analyze nonhomogeneous Poisson processes (NHPP) observed with noise, focusing on previously unstudied second-order characteristics of the noisy process. Utilizing a hierarchical Bayesian model with noisy data, we estimate hyperparameters governing a physically motivated NHPP intensity. Simulation studies demonstrate the reliability of this methodology in accurately estimating hyperparameters. Leveraging the posterior distribution, we then infer the probability of detecting a certain number of events within a given radius, the k-contact distance. We demonstrate our methodology with an application to observations of fast radio bursts (FRBs) detected by the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment’s FRB Project (CHIME/FRB). This approach allows us to identify repeating FRB sources by bounding or directly simulating the probability of observing k physically independent sources within some radius in the detection domain or the probability of coincidence (PC). The new methodology improves the repeater detection PC in 91% of cases when applied to the largest sample of previously classified observations, with a median improvement factor (existing metric over PC from our methodology) of ∼ 4800.
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 | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".