MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142922174 · doi:10.1007/s11336-011-9233-5

On the Relationships Between Jeffreys Modal and Weighted Likelihood Estimation of Ability Under Logistic IRT Models

2011· article· en· W2142922174 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

VenuePsychometrika · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorStatisticsMathematicsBayes estimatorConsistent estimatorInvariant estimatorTrimmed estimatorBias of an estimatorMinimax estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorEfficient estimatorItem response theoryModalEconometricsLogistic regressionPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on two estimators of ability with logistic item response theory models: the Bayesian modal (BM) estimator and the weighted likelihood (WL) estimator. For the BM estimator, Jeffreys’ prior distribution is considered, and the corresponding estimator is referred to as the Jeffreys modal (JM) estimator. It is established that under the three-parameter logistic model, the JM estimator returns larger estimates than the WL estimator. Several implications of this result are outlined.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.709
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.265 · 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