MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116104026 · doi:10.2307/3316142

A similarity analysis of curves

2002· article· en· W2116104026 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yolanda Muñoz Maldonado, Joan G. Staniswalis, Louis N. Irwin, Donna M. Byers

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermutation (music)Null hypothesisSimilarity (geometry)Null (SQL)MathematicsBasis (linear algebra)Null distributionAlternative hypothesisStatistical hypothesis testingStatisticsDistribution (mathematics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceData miningMathematical analysisTest statisticImage (mathematics)PhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors propose a method for comparing two samples of curves. The notion of similarity between two curves is the basis of three statistics they suggest for testing the null hypothesis of no difference between the two groups. They exploit standard tools from functional data analysis to preprocess the observed curves and use the permutation distribution under the null hypothesis to obtain p ‐values for their tests. They explore the operating characteristics of these tests through simulations and as an application, compare the ganglioside distribution in brain tissue between old and young rats.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207