Optimal Decision Rules for Composite Binary Hypothesis Testing under Neyman-Pearson Framework
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
The composite binary hypothesis testing problem within the Neyman-Pearson framework is considered. The goal is to maximize the expectation of a nonlinear function of the detection probability, integrated with respect to a given probability measure, subject to a false-alarm constraint. It is shown that each power function can be realized by a generalized Bayes rule that maximizes an integrated rejection probability with respect to a finite signed measure. For a simple null hypothesis and a composite alternative, optimal single-threshold decision rules based on an appropriately weighted likelihood ratio are derived. The analysis is extended to composite null hypotheses, including both average and worst-case false-alarm constraints, resulting in modified optimal threshold rules. Special cases involving exponential family distributions and numerical examples are provided to illustrate the theoretical results.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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