MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109121987 · doi:10.1002/etc.2915

Quantifying natural variability as a method to detect environmental change: Definitions of the normal range for a single observation and the mean of <i>m</i> observations

2015· article· en· W2109121987 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy J. Barrett, Kelly Hille, Rainie L. Sharpe, Katherine M. Harris, Hilary M. Machtans, Peter M. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalityStatisticsRange (aeronautics)Standard deviationReference valuesNormal distributionPopulation meanSample (material)Confidence intervalReference rangePopulationReference dataSample size determinationEnvironmental scienceMathematicsData miningComputer scienceMedicineChemistryEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The normal range has been defined as the range that encloses 95% of reference values; in practice this range has been defined as the reference mean ± 2 standard deviations (SD). When sample sizes are small and reference data are not normally distributed, the mean ± 2 SDs do not enclose 95% of data values. Prediction intervals (PI) calculated using sample statistics are used in the present study to define the normal range for a single observation and the mean of m observations. The PIs provide confidence limits for the next randomly selected observation (or mean of m observations) from a population. The PIs are defined using normally distributed reference data; normality can typically be achieved with transformations of the data. Covariates can be used to explain some of the variability in the reference distribution, increasing the ability to detect change. When assumptions of normality are not met, alternative methods of defining the normal range are provided. The normal range can be used to quantify natural variability and assess change from the reference distribution. It can be used as an early warning indicator of change in environmental monitoring to identify the need for further investigation.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207