MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124921651 · doi:10.1080/03610920701669868

On the Expressions of Estimability in Testing General Linear Hypotheses

2008· article· en· W2124921651 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

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsKraft Heinz (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral linear modelMathematicsLinear modelApplied mathematicsStatisticTest statisticParametric statisticsSubject (documents)Statistical hypothesis testingStatisticsCalculus (dental)Computer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In testing a general linear hypothesis of the form K ′β ∊ ( W ′) under a general linear model, an equivalent hypothesis involving only estimable parametric functions is provided, and then an explicit test statistic in terms of the model matrices is given. The corresponding results are expanded to the case of a general linear model with a restriction and are illustrated by an example. Keywords: Equivalent general linear hypothesesEstimabilityEstimable functionsGeneral linear modelsTestable hypothesisMathematics Subject Classification: Primary 62F03Secondary 62H15 Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to the referee and to the editor for their very helpful suggestions, which led to the improved version of this paper.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.161 · 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