Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rejection threshold used for e-values and e-processes is by default set to $1/α$ for a guaranteed type-I error control at $α$, based on Markov's and Ville's inequalities. This threshold can be wasteful in practical applications. We discuss how this threshold can be improved under additional distributional assumptions on the e-values; some of these assumptions are naturally plausible and empirically observable, without knowing explicitly the form or model of the e-values. For small values of $α$, the threshold can roughly be improved (divided) by a factor of $2$ for decreasing or unimodal densities, and by a factor of $e$ for decreasing or unimodal-symmetric densities of log-transformed e-values. Moreover, we propose to use the supremum of comonotonic e-values, which is shown to preserve the type-I error guarantee. We also propose some preliminary methods to boost e-values in the e-BH procedure under some distributional assumptions while controlling the false discovery rate. Through a series of simulation studies, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed methods in various testing scenarios, showing enhanced power.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it