MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7023949744

Practical issues in modern Monte Carlo integration

2007· dissertation· en· W7023949744 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2007
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMarginal likelihoodMonte Carlo methodMonte Carlo integrationGridBayesian probabilityImportance samplingModel selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Adaptive quadrature
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computing marginal likelihoods to perform Bayesian model selection is a challenging task, particularly when the models considered involve a large number of parameters. In this thesis, we propose the use of an adaptive quadrature algorithm to automate the selection of the grid in path sampling, an integration technique recognized as one of the most powerful Monte Carlo integration statistical methods for marginal likelihood estimation. We begin by examining the impact of two tuning parameters of path sampling, the choice of the importance density and the specification of the grid, which are both shown to be potentially very influential. We then present, in detail, the Grid Selection by Adaptive Quadrature (GSAQ) algorithm for selecting the grid. We perform a comparison between the GSAQ and standard grid implementation of path sampling using two well-studied data sets; the GSAQ approach is found to yield superior results. GSAQ is then successfully applied to a longitudinal hierarchical regression model selection problem in Multiple Sclerosis research.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207