MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409085222 · doi:10.18280/mmep.120330

Alpha Power Type II-G Family: Adding a Power Parameter of Distributions

2025· article· en· W4409085222 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Layla Abdul Jaleel Mohsin, Hazim Ghdhaib Kalt

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Diagnostics and Reliability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)Type (biology)MathematicsPhysicsBiologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a new family of distributions named the Alpha Power Type II-G (APII-G) family, which emerges as a groundbreaking modeling strategy for examining data governed by univariate continuous distributions.This family aims to enhance the modeling capabilities of continuous prior distributions to better fit the data utilizing a new function encompassing the additional parameter power.The innovative methodology implemented encompasses two continuous distributions: firstly, the oneparameter exponential distribution, which engendered a fresh two-parameter, Alpha Power II Exponential (APIIE) distribution, and secondly, the two-parameter Weibull distribution, which yielded a new three-parameter, Alpha Power II Weibull (APIIW) distribution.Moreover, a scrutiny of the characteristics and statistical functions, and the estimations of the parameters of the two distributions.The efficacy of these estimators is substantiated through simulation studies and finding the mean square error (MSE) and bias values of the estimators compared to sample sizes.It has been empirically proven that the two suggested models outperformed the asymptotic distributions they were compared against using multiple goodness-fit criteria as Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), corrected AIC (CAIC) and Hannan-Quinn information criterion (HQIC) on authentic datasets, The values of these criteria appeared to be the lowest for the two new distributions, which means that the new distributions are the best, especially in the context of the given data.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicEngineering Diagnostics and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207