FORWARD SELECTION OF EXPLANATORY VARIABLES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a new way of using forward selection of explanatory variables in regression or canonical redundancy analysis. The classical forward selection method presents two problems: a highly inflated Type I error and an overestimation of the amount of explained variance. Correcting these problems will greatly improve the performance of this very useful method in ecological modeling. To prevent the first problem, we propose a two-step procedure. First, a global test using all explanatory variables is carried out. If, and only if, the global test is significant, one can proceed with forward selection. To prevent overestimation of the explained variance, the forward selection has to be carried out with two stopping criteria: (1) the usual alpha significance level and (2) the adjusted coefficient of multiple determination (Ra(2)) calculated using all explanatory variables. When forward selection identifies a variable that brings one or the other criterion over the fixed threshold, that variable is rejected, and the procedure is stopped. This improved method is validated by simulations involving univariate and multivariate response data. An ecological example is presented using data from the Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah, U.S.A.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".