MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079540101 · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.10.1.65

A Latent Markov Model for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data Collected in Continuous Time: States, Durations, and Transitions.

2005· article· en· W2079540101 on OpenAlexaff
Ulf Böckenholt

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Methods · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizationMarkov chainMarkov modelComputer scienceMarkov processEconometricsLatent variableVariable-order Markov modelSampling (signal processing)StatisticsObservableDuration (music)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Markov models provide a general framework for analyzing and interpreting time dependencies in psychological applications. Recent work extended Markov models to the case of latent states because frequently psychological states are not directly observable and subject to measurement error. This article presents a further generalization of latent Markov models to allow for the analysis of rating data that are collected at arbitrary points in time. This extension offers new ways of investigating change processes by focusing explicitly on the durations that are spent in latent states. In an experience sampling application the author shows that such duration analyses can provide valuable insights about chronometric features of emotions.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.273
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations47
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological MethodsSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207