MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098921803

Random Fields and Stochastic Geometry (09w5040)

2009· article· en· W7098921803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFungal Infections and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic geometryRandom fieldRandom compact setField (mathematics)Point (geometry)Random elementStochastic processGaussianProbability theoryVariety (cybernetics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main topics of this workshop lay at the point where Probability meets Geometry, specifically the study of the random geometry and topology generated by smooth random functions. While these problems have their roots in various applications of image and shape analysis in a wide variety of disciplines, their main mathematical content lies in probability theory. It is there that recent major advances led us to holding a workshop in this general area at this particular time. Specifically, over the last few years, a minor revolution, which was born in Jonathan Taylor’s McGill Ph.D. thesis, has been taking place regarding the way the sample path properties of smooth multi-parameter stochastic processes, or random fields, have been studied. While the setting is primarily in the world of Gaussian random fields, the basic results also extend out into the non-Gaussian world. The approach is based on treating parameter spaces, where possible, as Riemannian manifolds with metrics induced by the fields. These results involve an intruiging blend of probability and geometry, and although the revolution has, primarily, been taking place at the level of theoretical mathematics, it has already had an impact on applications of random field theory in applied settings as wide apart as astrophysics and medical imaging. The interface between random field theory and stochastic geometry has been at the centre of this activity, which is why most of the participants in the workshop came from the areas of this interface. However, it

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1630.050

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFungal Infections and StudiesFrench-language works237,207