Building a Better Model: An Introduction to Structural Equation Modelling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modelling (SEM) are powerful extensions of path analysis, which was described in a previous article in this series. CFA differs from the more traditional exploratory factor analysis in that the relations among the variables are specified a priori, which permits more powerful tests of construct validity for scales. It can also be used to compare different versions of a scale (for example, English and French) and to determine whether the scale performs equivalently in different groups (for example, men and women). SEM expands on path analysis by allowing paths to be drawn between latent variables (which, in other techniques, are called factors or hypothetical constructs), that is, variables that are not seen directly but, rather, through their effect on observable variables, such as questionnaires and behavioural measures. Each latent variable and its associated measured variables form small CFAs, with the added advantage that the correlations among the variables can be corrected for the unreliability of the measures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it