MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096297186 · doi:10.1024/1662-9647/a000054

Intensive Measurement Designs for Research on Aging

2012· article· en· W2096297186 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Rast, Stuart MacDonald, Scott M. Hofer

Bibliographic record

VenueGeroPsych · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungMichael Smith Health Research BCNational Science Foundation
KeywordsReliability engineeringComputer sciencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intensive measurement burst designs permit analysis of behavioral and biological processes as they unfold over short and long periods of time and providing the opportunity to identify change from an individual's normative level of functioning. The measurement burst design permits statistical decomposition of short-term variation and learning effects that overlay normative aging and provide stronger bases for detecting accelerated change due to pathological processes. We provide an overview of design features and analysis of measurement burst data in Project MIND. The objective of intensive measurement designs is to obtain greater resolution of processes of interest that permit reliable and sensitive assessments of functioning and change in functioning and of key determinants underlying short-term variation and long-term aging and health-related change.

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)0.167
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.304
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 score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1670.304
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.004

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 head0.663
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeroPsychSame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207