MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1871748041 · doi:10.25336/p66k60

Stability and Change: Illustrations with Categorical and Binary Responses

2001· article· en· W1871748041 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fernando Rajulton, Zenaida R. Ravanera

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableBinary numberStability (learning theory)Binary dataLongitudinal studyLongitudinal dataComputer scienceStatisticsMathematicsData miningMachine learningArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Longitudinal data consist of time-sequences of measurements, counts or categorical responses from the same experimental units. Thus, they have a distinct advantage over cross-sectional data in that they provide us the information on both stability and change. It is recommended therefore that any longitudinal study should tap this information through available techniques. In social science research, the use of categorical and binary responses is more frequent than the use of continuous-time responses. This paper aims to show that more detailed and sophisticated analysis can be done even with categorical and binary sequences collected through longitudinal surveys. After proposing two paradigms that may be used in the explanations of stability and change, the paper presents two illustrations for the analysis of categorical and binary sequences.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation StudiesFrench-language works237,207