MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064765903 · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.8.4.468

Bidimensional Regression: Assessing the Configural Similarity and Accuracy of Cognitive Maps and Other Two-Dimensional Data Sets.

2003· article· en· W2064765903 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

VenuePsychological Methods · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimilarity (geometry)RegressionFidelityRegression analysisEuclidean distanceDistortion (music)Euclidean geometryArtificial intelligenceMathematicsCognitionCognitive mapLinear regressionPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsPsychologyComputer scienceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bidimensional regression is a method for comparing the degree of resemblance between 2 planar configurations of points and, more generally, for assessing the nature of the geometry (Euclidean and non-Euclidean) between 2-dimensional independent and dependent variables. For example, it can assess the similarity between location estimates from different tasks or participant groups, measure the fidelity between cognitive maps and actual locations, and provide parameters for psychological process models. The authors detail the formal similarity between uni- and bidimensional regression, provide computational methods and a new index of spatial distortion, outline the advantages of bidimensional regression over other techniques, and provide guidelines for its use. The authors conclude by describing substantive areas in psychology for which the method would be appropriate and uniquely illuminating.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.306 · 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