MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413195541 · doi:10.1007/s11238-025-10083-7

Oriented data-generating processes: a categorization of ROC curves

2025· article· en· W4413195541 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory and Decision · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorizationReceiver operating characteristicMathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceStatisticsData miningEconometricsPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decision makers attempting to classify a binary state of the world may commit two types of errors. Even when the two alternative states have equal prior probabilities and when the two types of errors are equally costly, a classification criterion may be chosen which leads to one type of error being committed more frequently than the other, because of asymmetries in the data that informs their decisions. We formalize this possibility through a categorization of data-generating processes (DGPs), which may be ‘oriented’ towards evidence favoring one of the two alternatives, or which may be ‘unoriented’. We identify the shape properties of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves associated with DGPs in these three categories. We also identify the orientation of DGPs obtained from common distribution families. Then, we illustrate the usefulness of our categorization with several applications, e.g., the standard decision making problem, ranking intersecting ROC curves for particular classes of decision makers, interpreting Bayesian persuasion strategies, and burden of proof assignments in simple litigation settings.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.287 · 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