MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123269459 · doi:10.1111/insr.12067

On Some Principles of Statistical Inference

2014· article· en· W2123269459 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Statistical Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Statistical inferenceComputer scienceInferenceFoundation (evidence)Field (mathematics)Statistical theoryManagement scienceCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Data scienceArtificial intelligenceEpistemologyMathematicsStatisticsEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Statistical theory aims to provide a foundation for studying the collection and interpretation of data, a foundation that does not depend on the particular details of the substantive field in which the data are being considered. This gives a systematic way to approach new problems, and a common language for summarising results; ideally, the foundations and common language ensure that statistical aspects of one study, or of several studies on closely related phenomena, can be broadly accessible. We discuss some principles of statistical inference, to outline how these are, or could be, used to inform the interpretation of results, and to provide a greater degree of coherence for the foundations of statistics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.045
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.321 · 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