Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When data are nonnormal in form classical procedures for assessing treatment group equality are prone to distortions in rates of Type I error and power to detect effects. Replacing the usual means with trimmed means reduces rates of Type I error and increases sensitivity to detect effects. If data are skewed, say to the right, then it has been postulated that asymmetric trimming, to the right, should be better at controlling rates of Type I error and power to detect effects than symmetric trimming from both tails of the data distribution. Keselman, Wilcox, Othman and Fradette (2002) found that Babu, Padmanabhan and Puri's (1999) test for symmetry when combined with a heteroscedastic statistic which compared either symmetrically or asymmetrically determined means provided excellent Type I error control even when data were extremely heterogeneous and very nonnormal in form. In this paper, we present a detailed discussion of the Babu et al. procedure as well as a numerical example demonstrating its use.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.211 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it