Inference for Stereological Extremes
体视学极值推断AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要的极值问题属于材料质量控制,未涉及金融尾部风险或系统性风险,不能据极值一词归入金融风险。
体视学极值推断AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
In the production of clean steels, the occurrence of imperfections—so-called “inclusions”—is unavoidable. The strength of a clean steel block is largely dependent on the size of the largest imperfection that it contains, so inference on extreme inclusion size forms an important part of quality control. Sampling is generally done by measuring imperfections on planar slices, leading to an extreme value version of a standard stereological problem: how to make inference on large inclusions using only the sliced observations. Under the assumption that inclusions are spherical, this problem has been tackled previously using a combination of extreme value models, stereological calculations, a Bayesian hierarchical model, and standard Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques. Our objectives in this article are twofold: (1) to assess the robustness of such inferences with respect to the assumption of spherical inclusions, and (2) to develop an inference procedure that is valid for nonspherical inclusions. We investigate both of these aspects by extending the spherical family for inclusion shapes to a family of ellipsoids. We then address the issue of robustness by assessing the performance of the spherical model when fitted to measurements obtained from a simulation of ellipsoidal inclusions. The issue of inference is more difficult, because likelihood calculation is not feasible for the ellipsoidal model. To handle this aspect, we propose a modification to a recently developed likelihood-free MCMC algorithm. After verifying the viability and accuracy of the proposed algorithm through a simulation study, we analyze a real inclusion dataset, comparing the inference obtained under the ellipsoidal inclusion model with that previously obtained assuming spherical inclusions.