A Monte Carlo Study of the Effect of Item Characteristic Curve Estimation on the Accuracy of Three Person-Fit Statistics
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, there have been no studies comparing parametric and nonparametric Item Characteristic Curve (ICC) estimation methods on the effectiveness of Person-Fit Statistics (PFS). The primary aim of this study was to determine if the use of ICCs estimated by nonparametric methods would increase the accuracy of item response theory—based PFS for small sample sizes. Using three recognized PFS (l z , ECI2 z , and ECI4 z ), four estimation methods were compared: two parametric methods (the two-parameter logistic model and three-parameter logistic model) and two nonparametric methods (Nadaraya-Watson's regression and the local logistic regression). Finally, matrices of 100- and 1,000-answer vectors were generated for this Monte Carlo study. For both large and small sample sizes, the accuracy of the PFS was greater when used with the parametric 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it