Papers › Inference through innovation processes tested in the authorship attribution task
Inference through innovation processes tested in the authorship attribution task
Giulio Tani Raffaelli, Margherita Lalli, Francesca Tria
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Urn models for innovation capture fundamental empirical laws shared by several real-world processes. The so-called urn model with triggering includes, as particular cases, the urn representation of the two-parameter Poisson-Dirichlet process and the Dirichlet process, seminal in Bayesian non-parametric inference. In this work, we leverage this connection to introduce a general approach for quantifying closeness between symbolic sequences and test it within the framework of the authorship attribution problem. The method demonstrates high accuracy when compared to other related methods in different scenarios, featuring a substantial gain in computational efficiency and theoretical transparency. Beyond the practical convenience, this work demonstrates how the recently established connection between urn models and non-parametric Bayesian inference can pave the way for designing more efficient inference methods. In particular, the hybrid approach that we propose allows us to relax the exchangeability hypothesis, which can be particularly relevant for systems exhibiting complex correlation patterns and non-stationary dynamics.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections