Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates a regression model for orthogonal matrices introduced by Prentice (1989). It focuses on the special case of 3 × 3 rotation matrices. The model under study expresses the dependent rotation matrixVasA1UAt2perturbed by experimental errors, whereA1andA2are unknown 3 × 3 rotation matrices andUis an explanatory 3 × 3 rotation matrix. Several specifications for the errors in this regression model are proposed. The asymptotic distributions, as the sample size n becomes large or as the experimental errors become small, of the least squares estimators forA1andA2are derived. A new algorithm for calculating the least squares estimates ofA1andA2is presented. The independence model is not a submodel of Prentice's regression model, thus the independence between theUand theVsample cannot be tested when fitting Prentice's model. To overcome this difficulty, permutation tests of independence are investigated. Examples dealing with postural variations of subjects performing a drilling task and with the calibration of a camera system for motion analysis using a magnetic tracking device illustrate the methodology of this paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".