MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035652047 · doi:10.1007/bf02294375

A Multistage Ranking Model

2000· article· en· W2035652047 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

VenuePsychometrika · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)GeneralizationRank (graph theory)Matrix (chemical analysis)Set (abstract data type)Maximum likelihoodStatisticsMathematicsMatrix modelApplied mathematicsComputer scienceEconometricsArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a ( n −1) 2 parameter, multistage ranking model, which represents a generalization of Luce's model. We propose the n × n item-rank relative frequency matrix ( p -matrix) as a device for summarizing a set of rankings. As an alternative to the traditional maximum likelihood estimation, for the proposed model we suggest a method which estimates the parameters from the p -matrix. An illustrative numerical example is given. The proposed model and its differences from Luce's model are briefly discussed. We also show some special p -matrix patterns possessed by the Thurstonian models and distance-based models.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.009

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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.178 · 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