MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413289142 · doi:10.1002/sam.70038

Distributionally Conservative Stochastic Dominance via Subsampling

2025· article· en· W4413289142 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

VenueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic dominanceDominance (genetics)EconometricsStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceEconomicsMathematical optimizationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This note defines distributionally conservative versions of stochastic dominance relations based on subsampling. It presents a non‐asymptotic analysis of the probability of the false dominance (FD) error for the empirical version of the subsampling‐based empirical dominance procedure. The analysis is based on the generalization of the McDiarmid's concentration inequality to ‐mixing processes by Kontorovich and Ramanan. The concentration bounds obtained depend on the entropy characteristics of the problem, such as the Lipschitz coefficients of the utilities involved, the FD parameters involved, and the coefficients that represent temporal dependence at each subsample. The analysis establishes tighter concentration bounds for the conservative procedure in both stationary and nonstationary cases when the subsampling rate is appropriately chosen.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0060.003
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.311 · 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