MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050525479 · doi:10.1198/tech.2009.07182

Two-Stage Leveraged Measurement System Assessment

2009· article· en· W2050525479 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan P. Browne, Robert J. MacKay, Stefan Steiner

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnometrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsEstimatorStandard deviationMeasure (data warehouse)StatisticsStage (stratigraphy)Baseline (sea)Computer scienceIntraclass correlationSample (material)Reliability engineeringMathematicsData miningEngineeringReproducibility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assess measurement system variation, we propose an alternative to the standard plan that uses a random sample of parts to repeatedly measure. The new plan, called Leveraged Measurement System Assessment is conducted in two stages. In the first stage, called the baseline, a number of parts are measured once. In the second stage, we select a few extreme parts (based on their initial measurement in the baseline) and remeasure each of them a number of times. We demonstrate the advantage of the leveraged over the standard plan by comparing the bias and standard deviation of estimators of the intraclass correlation coefficient. We also present a method to determine sample size when planning a Leveraged Measurement System Assessment.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.187 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnometricsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207