MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994303059 · doi:10.1080/00220970309602065

Pairwise Multiple Comparisons: New Yardstick, New Results

2003· article· en· W1994303059 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Experimental Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBonferroni correctionMultiple comparisons problemFalse discovery rateStatisticsPairwise comparisonWord error rateType I and type II errorsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behavioral science researchers often wish to compare the means of several treatment conditions on a specific dependent measure. The author used a Monte Carlo study to compare familywise error controlling multiple comparison procedures (MCPs; Tukey, Bonferroni) with MCPs that were not developed to control the familywise error rate on the probability of correctly identifying the true underlying population mean configuration (true model rate). Recently proposed MCPs that are not intended to control the familywise error rate had consistently larger true model rates than did familywise error controlling MCPs. Furthermore, of the familywise error controlling MCPs investigated, the popular Tukey and Bonferroni MCPs had consistently lower true model rates than did other familywise error controlling MCPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.559
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.022 · 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