MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038840372 · doi:10.1080/01621459.2011.641430

Topological Analysis of Variance and the Maxillary Complex

2012· article· en· W2038840372 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 the American Statistical Association · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopological and Geometric Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopological data analysisPersistent homologyVariance (accounting)Curse of dimensionalityNonlinear systemComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)High dimensionalComputational topologyLandmarkTheoretical computer scienceData miningAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is common to reduce the dimensionality of data before applying classical multivariate analysis techniques in statistics. Persistent homology, a recent development in computational topology, has been shown to be useful for analyzing high-dimensional (nonlinear) data. In this article, we connect computational topology with the traditional analysis of variance and demonstrate the value of combining these approaches on a three-dimensional orthodontic landmark dataset derived from the maxillary complex. Indeed, combining appropriate techniques of both persistent homology and analysis of variance results in a better understanding of the data’s nonlinear features over and above what could have been achieved by classical means. Supplementary material for this article is available online.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.259 · 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