MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033393326 · doi:10.1002/cem.1206

Modeling multi‐way data with linearly dependent loadings

2009· article· en· W2033393326 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

VenueJournal of Chemometrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicTensor decomposition and applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationContext (archaeology)Linear modelMathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmBiological systemStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A generalization/specialization of the PARAFAC model is developed that improves its properties when applied to multi‐way problems involving linearly dependent factors. This model is called PARALIND (PARAllel profiles with LINear Dependences). Linear dependences can arise when the empirical sources of variation being modeled by factors are causally or logically linked during data generation, or circumstantially linked during data collection. For example, this can occur in a chemical context when end products are related to the precursor or in a psychological context when a single stimulus generates two incompatible feelings at once. For such cases, the most theoretically appropriate PARAFAC model has loading vectors that are linearly dependent in at least one mode, and when collinear, are nonunique in the others. However, standard PARAFAC analysis of fallible data will have neither of these features. Instead, latent linear dependences become high surface correlations and any latent nonuniqueness is replaced by a meaningless surface‐level ‘unique orientation’ that optimally fits the particular random noise in that sample. To avoid these problems, any set of components that in theory should be rank deficient are re‐expressed in PARALIND as a product of two matrices, one that explicitly represents their dependency relationships and another, with fewer columns, that captures their patterns of variation. To demonstrate the approach, we apply it first to fluorescence spectroscopy (excitation‐emission matrices, EEM) data in which concentration values for two analytes covary exactly, and then to flow injection analysis (FIA) data in which subsets of columns are logically constrained to sum to a constant, but differently in each of two modes. In the PARAFAC solutions of the EEM data, all factors are ‘unique’ but this is only meaningful for two of the factors that are also unique at the latent level. In contrast, the PARALIND solutions directly display the extent and nature of partial nonuniqueness present at the latent level by exhibiting a corresponding partial uniqueness in their recovered loadings. For the FIA data, PARALIND constraints restore latent uniqueness to the concentration estimates. Comparison of the solutions shows that PARALIND more accurately recovers latent structure, presumably because it uses fewer parameters and hence fits less error. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.234 · 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