Genetic Algorithm-Based Bayesian Optimal Design for Network Experiments
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
We consider the problem of designing an experiment in which experimental units are connected on a network. To find optimal designs for such experiments, the experimental outcomes are assumed to follow a network-outcome model in which units potentially influence one another. To model network interference and correlation, these outcome models are often complex. As a result, the design criteria based on such models depend on unknown parameters and cannot be directly evaluated without making assumptions about their values. We mitigate this problem by defining a Bayesian design criterion, which is the mean squared error of the average treatment effect estimator integrated over a prior distribution for the unknown parameters. In general, this criterion does not have a closed-form formula, and so traditional algorithms to solve for optimal designs cannot be applied. Instead, we propose and study the use of the genetic algorithm to find near-optimal designs. Through extensive numerical studies with various real-life networks and network-outcome models, we demonstrate the robust performance of our method compared to existing design construction strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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