MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ASSESSING CONGRUENCEAMONG DISTANCE MATRICES: SINGLE‐MALT SCOTCH WHISKIES REVISITED

2004· article· en· W2052006920 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

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsDistance matrices in phylogenyMantel testGeneralizationDistance matrixMatrix (chemical analysis)StatisticsCongruence (geometry)Similarity (geometry)CombinatoricsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGeometryImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A test of congruence among distance matrices is described. It tests the hypothesis that several matrices, containing different types of variables about the same objects, are congruent with one another, so they can be used jointly in statistical analysis. Raw data tables are turned into similarity or distance matrices prior to testing; they can then be compared to data that naturally come in the form of distance matrices. The proposed test can be seen as a generalization of the Mantel test of matrix correspondence to any number of distance matrices. This paper shows that the new test has the correct rate of Type I error and good power. Power increases as the number of objects and the number of congruent data matrices increase; power is higher when the total number of matrices in the study is smaller. To illustrate the method, the proposed test is used to test the hypothesis that matrices representing different types of organoleptic variables (colour, nose, body, palate and finish) in single‐malt Scotch whiskies are congruent.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.255 · 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