MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403577681 · doi:10.1214/25-aoas2115

K-contact distance for noisy nonhomogeneous spatial point data with application to repeating fast radio burst sources

2024· preprint· en· W4403577681 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ashley M. Cook, Dayi Li, Gwendolyn M. Eadie, David C. Stenning, Paul Scholz, Derek Bingham, Radu V. Craiu, B. M. Gaensler, Kiyoshi W. Masui, Ziggy Pleunis, Antonio Herrera-Martin, Ronniy C. Joseph, Ayush Pandhi, Aaron B. Pearlman, J. X. Prochaska

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Applied Statistics · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityYork UniversityMcGill University Health CentreSimon Fraser UniversityCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
FundersSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPoint (geometry)Computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Applied StatisticsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207