亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

Fisher's fiducial argument is widely viewed as a failed version of Neyman's theory of confidence limits. But Fisher's goal -- Bayesian-like probabilistic uncertainty quantification without priors -- was more ambitious than Neyman's, and it's not out of reach. I've recently shown that reliable, prior-free probabilistic uncertainty quantification must be grounded in the theory of imprecise probability, and I've put forward a possibility-theoretic solution that achieves it. This has been met with resistance, however, in part due to statisticians' singular focus on confidence limits. Indeed, if imprecision isn't needed to perform confidence-limit-related tasks, then what's the point? In this paper, for a class of practically useful models, I explain specifically why the fiducial argument gives valid confidence limits, i.e., it's the "best probabilistic approximation" of the possibilistic solution I recently advanced. This sheds new light on what the fiducial argument is doing and on what's lost in terms of reliability when imprecision is ignored and the fiducial argument is pushed for more than just confidence limits.

Advances in large language models (LLMs) have driven an explosion of interest about their societal impacts. Much of the discourse around how they will impact social equity has been cautionary or negative, focusing on questions like "how might LLMs be biased and how would we mitigate those biases?" This is a vital discussion: the ways in which AI generally, and LLMs specifically, can entrench biases have been well-documented. But equally vital, and much less discussed, is the more opportunity-focused counterpoint: "what promising applications do LLMs enable that could promote equity?" If LLMs are to enable a more equitable world, it is not enough just to play defense against their biases and failure modes. We must also go on offense, applying them positively to equity-enhancing use cases to increase opportunities for underserved groups and reduce societal discrimination. There are many choices which determine the impact of AI, and a fundamental choice very early in the pipeline is the problems we choose to apply it to. If we focus only later in the pipeline -- making LLMs marginally more fair as they facilitate use cases which intrinsically entrench power -- we will miss an important opportunity to guide them to equitable impacts. Here, we highlight the emerging potential of LLMs to promote equity by presenting four newly possible, promising research directions, while keeping risks and cautionary points in clear view.

A posteriori reduced-order models, e.g. proper orthogonal decomposition, are essential to affordably tackle realistic parametric problems. They rely on a trustful training set, that is a family of full-order solutions (snapshots) representative of all possible outcomes of the parametric problem. Having such a rich collection of snapshots is not, in many cases, computationally viable. A strategy for data augmentation, designed for parametric laminar incompressible flows, is proposed to enrich poorly populated training sets. The goal is to include in the new, artificial snapshots emerging features, not present in the original basis, that do enhance the quality of the reduced-order solution. The methodologies devised are based on exploiting basic physical principles, such as mass and momentum conservation, to devise physically-relevant, artificial snapshots at a fraction of the cost of additional full-order solutions. Interestingly, the numerical results show that the ideas exploiting only mass conservation (i.e., incompressibility) are not producing significant added value with respect to the standard linear combinations of snapshots. Conversely, accounting for the linearized momentum balance via the Oseen equation does improve the quality of the resulting approximation and therefore is an effective data augmentation strategy in the framework of viscous incompressible laminar flows.

Dependence is undoubtedly a central concept in statistics. Though, it proves difficult to locate in the literature a formal definition which goes beyond the self-evident 'dependence = non-independence'. This absence has allowed the term 'dependence' and its declination to be used vaguely and indiscriminately for qualifying a variety of disparate notions, leading to numerous incongruities. For example, the classical Pearson's, Spearman's or Kendall's correlations are widely regarded as 'dependence measures' of major interest, in spite of returning 0 in some cases of deterministic relationships between the variables at play, evidently not measuring dependence at all. Arguing that research on such a fundamental topic would benefit from a slightly more rigid framework, this paper suggests a general definition of the dependence between two random variables defined on the same probability space. Natural enough for aligning with intuition, that definition is still sufficiently precise for allowing unequivocal identification of a 'universal' representation of the dependence structure of any bivariate distribution. Links between this representation and familiar concepts are highlighted, and ultimately, the idea of a dependence measure based on that universal representation is explored and shown to satisfy Renyi's postulates.

Most categorical models for dependent types have traditionally been heavily set based: contexts form a category, and for each we have a set of types in said context -- and for each type a set of terms of said type. This is the case for categories with families, categories with attributes, and natural models; in particular, all of them can be traced back to certain discrete Grothendieck fibrations. We extend this intuition to the case of general, non necessarily discrete, fibrations, so that over a given context one has not only a set but a category of types. We argue that the added structure can be attributed to a notion of subtyping that shares many features with that of coercive subtyping, in the sense that it is the product of thinking about subtyping as an abbreviation mechanism: we say that a given type $A'$ is a subtype of $A$ if there is a unique coercion from $A'$ to $A$. Whenever we need a term of type $A$, then, it suffices to have a term of type $A'$, which we can `plug-in' into $A$. For this version of subtyping we provide rules, coherences, and explicit models, and we compare and contrast it to coercive subtyping as introduced by Z. Luo and others. We conclude by suggesting how the tools we present can be employed in finding appropriate rules relating subtyping and certain type constructors.

Forecast reconciliation is the post-forecasting process aimed to revise a set of incoherent base forecasts into coherent forecasts in line with given data structures. Most of the point and probabilistic regression-based forecast reconciliation results ground on the so called "structural representation" and on the related unconstrained generalized least squares reconciliation formula. However, the structural representation naturally applies to genuine hierarchical/grouped time series, where the top- and bottom-level variables are uniquely identified. When a general linearly constrained multiple time series is considered, the forecast reconciliation is naturally expressed according to a projection approach. While it is well known that the classic structural reconciliation formula is equivalent to its projection approach counterpart, so far it is not completely understood if and how a structural-like reconciliation formula may be derived for a general linearly constrained multiple time series. Such an expression would permit to extend reconciliation definitions, theorems and results in a straightforward manner. In this paper, we show that for general linearly constrained multiple time series it is possible to express the reconciliation formula according to a "structural-like" approach that keeps distinct free and constrained, instead of bottom and upper (aggregated), variables, establish the probabilistic forecast reconciliation framework, and apply these findings to obtain fully reconciled point and probabilistic forecasts for the aggregates of the Australian GDP from income and expenditure sides, and for the European Area GDP disaggregated by income, expenditure and output sides and by 19 countries.

In recent years many efforts have been devoted to finding bidiagonal factorizations of nonsingular totally positive matrices, since their accurate computation allows to numerically solve several important algebraic problems with great precision, even for large ill-conditioned matrices. In this framework, the present work provides the factorization of the collocation matrices of Newton bases -- of relevance when considering the Lagrange interpolation problem -- together with an algorithm that allows to numerically compute it to high relative accuracy. This further allows to determine the coefficients of the interpolating polynomial and to compute the singular values and the inverse of the collocation matrix. Conditions that guarantee high relative accuracy for these methods and, in the former case, for the classical recursion formula of divided differences, are determined. Numerical errors due to imprecise computer arithmetic or perturbed input data in the computation of the factorization are analyzed. Finally, numerical experiments illustrate the accuracy and effectiveness of the proposed methods with several algebraic problems, in stark contrast with traditional approaches.

As a crossover frontier of physics and mechanics, quantum computing is showing its great potential in computational mechanics. However, quantum hardware noise remains a critical barrier to achieving accurate simulation results due to the limitation of the current hardware level. In this paper, we integrate error-mitigated quantum computing in data-driven computational mechanics, where the zero-noise extrapolation (ZNE) technique is employed to improve the accuracy of quantum computing. Numerical examples including multiscale simulation of a composite L-shaped beam are conducted with the quantum computer simulator Qpanda, and the results validate the effectiveness of the proposed method. We believe this work presents a promising step towards using the power of quantum computing in computational mechanics.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) often fail silently with over-confident predictions on out-of-distribution (OOD) samples, posing risks in real-world deployments. Existing techniques predominantly emphasize either the feature representation space or the gradient norms computed with respect to DNN parameters, yet they overlook the intricate gradient distribution and the topology of classification regions. To address this gap, we introduce GRadient-aware Out-Of-Distribution detection in interpolated manifolds (GROOD), a novel framework that relies on the discriminative power of gradient space to distinguish between in-distribution (ID) and OOD samples. To build this space, GROOD relies on class prototypes together with a prototype that specifically captures OOD characteristics. Uniquely, our approach incorporates a targeted mix-up operation at an early intermediate layer of the DNN to refine the separation of gradient spaces between ID and OOD samples. We quantify OOD detection efficacy using the distance to the nearest neighbor gradients derived from the training set, yielding a robust OOD score. Experimental evaluations substantiate that the introduction of targeted input mix-upamplifies the separation between ID and OOD in the gradient space, yielding impressive results across diverse datasets. Notably, when benchmarked against ImageNet-1k, GROOD surpasses the established robustness of state-of-the-art baselines. Through this work, we establish the utility of leveraging gradient spaces and class prototypes for enhanced OOD detection for DNN in image classification.

The goal of explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to generate human-interpretable explanations, but there are no computationally precise theories of how humans interpret AI generated explanations. The lack of theory means that validation of XAI must be done empirically, on a case-by-case basis, which prevents systematic theory-building in XAI. We propose a psychological theory of how humans draw conclusions from saliency maps, the most common form of XAI explanation, which for the first time allows for precise prediction of explainee inference conditioned on explanation. Our theory posits that absent explanation humans expect the AI to make similar decisions to themselves, and that they interpret an explanation by comparison to the explanations they themselves would give. Comparison is formalized via Shepard's universal law of generalization in a similarity space, a classic theory from cognitive science. A pre-registered user study on AI image classifications with saliency map explanations demonstrate that our theory quantitatively matches participants' predictions of the AI.