MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6957909940 · doi:10.60692/9x9dc-f1a92

On Predictive Distribution of K-Inflated Poisson Models with and Without Additional Information

2020· article· en· W6957909940 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoisson distributionRandom variableEstimatorBayesian probabilityVariable (mathematics)ObservableDistribution (mathematics)Term (time)Prior informationCompound probability distribution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses different approaches in finding the Bayesian predictive distribution of a random variable from a Poisson model that can handle count data with an inflated value of K ∈ N, known as the KIP model. We explore how we can use other source of additional information to find such an estimator. More specifically, we find a Bayesian estimator of future density of random variable Y1 , based on observable X1 from the K1 IP(p1 , λ1 ) model, with and without assuming that there exists another random variable X2 , from the K2 IP(p2 , λ2 ) model, independent of X1 , provided λ1 ≥ λ2 , and compare their performance using simulation method.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207