MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Issues of Cost and Efficiency in the Design of Reliability Studies

2003· article· en· W2020776773 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed M. Shoukri, Musa Hakan Asyalı, Stephen D. Walter

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIntraclass correlationReliability (semiconductor)Variance (accounting)StatisticsReliability engineeringMathematicsComputer sciencePsychometricsEngineeringEconomicsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliability of continuous and dichotomous responses is usually assessed by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We derive the optimal allocation of the number of subjects k and the number of repeated measurements n that minimize the variance of the estimated ICC. Cost constraints are discussed for the case of normally distributed responses. Tables showing optimal choices of k and n are given, along with guidelines for the design of reliability studies in light of our results and those reported by others.

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)0.498
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.769
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4980.769
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.244
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.210 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207