MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153591306 · doi:10.1002/sam.11270

Principal axes analysis of symbolic histogram variables

2015· article· en· W2153591306 on OpenAlexaff
Sun Makosso‐Kallyth

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistogramMathematicsPrincipal component analysisEstimatorSymbolic data analysisQuantilePattern recognition (psychology)Histogram matchingStatisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new method to perform a principal axes analysis of symbolic histogram variables. In the symbolic data analysis framework, several Histogram Principal component Analysis (Histogram PCA) have been proposed. Some approaches focus on the relationships between some specific features of histograms such as the means or the quantiles. Others use the association for distributional variables based on the squared Wasserstein distance. In this paper, we propose two new approaches. The first one uses new correlation measures based on Fisher's z scores between corresponding bins of histogram variables. We also suggest the use of the estimator proposed by Olkin and Pratt. In the first approach, histogram variables must have the same number of bins. The second proposed approach, by contrast, extends the previous proposed correlations by considering the corresponding quantiles. This second approach can be used when histograms do not have the same number of bins.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science JournalSame topicSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFrench-language works237,207