MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095567388 · doi:10.4103/2153-3539.91130

An open-source software program for performing Bonferroni and related corrections for multiple comparisons

2011· article· en· W2095567388 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

VenueJournal of Pathology Informatics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBonferroni correctionSpurious relationshipFalse discovery rateMultiple comparisons problemComputer sciencePython (programming language)SoftwareOpen sourceOpen source softwareType I and type II errorsData miningStatisticsMachine learningMathematicsProgramming languageBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased type I error resulting from multiple statistical comparisons remains a common problem in the scientific literature. This may result in the reporting and promulgation of spurious findings. One approach to this problem is to correct groups of P-values for "family-wide significance" using a Bonferroni correction or the less conservative Bonferroni-Holm correction or to correct for the "false discovery rate" with a Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Although several solutions are available for performing this correction through commercially available software there are no widely available easy to use open source programs to perform these calculations. In this paper we present an open source program written in Python 3.2 that performs calculations for standard Bonferroni, Bonferroni-Holm and Benjamini-Hochberg corrections.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.486
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.049 · 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