MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091495431 · doi:10.1002/bimj.200290012

Evaluating Normal Approximation Confidence Intervals for Measures of 2 × 2 Association with Applications to Twin Data

2003· article· en· W2091495431 on OpenAlex
Mohamed M. Shoukri, Mohammad A. Chaudhary, Guerrache Mohamed

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

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersKing Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre
KeywordsStatisticsMathematicsConfidence intervalBinary dataCorrelationCoverage probabilitySample size determinationMonte Carlo methodSimilarity (geometry)PopulationEconometricsBinary numberComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Twin data are of interest to genetic epidemiologists for exploring the underlying genetic basis of disease development. When the outcome is binary, several indices of 2 × 2 association can be used to measure the degree of within twin similarity. All such measures share a common feature, in that they can be expressed as a monotonic increasing function of the within twin correlation. The sampling distributions of their estimates are influenced by the sample size, the correlation and the marginal distribution of the binary response. In this paper we use Monte‐Carlo simulations to estimate the empirical coverage probabilities and evaluate the adequacy of the classical normal confidence intervals on the population values of these measures.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.251 · 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