MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294779950 · doi:10.1080/01966324.2015.1137253

Estimating Regression Coefficients for Balanced Growth Curve Model When Time Trend of Baseline is Not Specified

2016· article· en· W2294779950 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Mathematical and Management Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsBaseline (sea)MathematicsStatisticsRegression analysisRegressionEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SYNOPTIC ABSTRACTThis article presents a method for estimating the regression coefficients for a growth curve model when the time trend of the baseline has not been specified. The concept of this method is similar to that of the Cox proportional hazard model. No particular shape is assumed for the baseline time trends, or, alternatively, it can be assumed that they are estimated nonparametrically. Because of these nuisance parameters for the baseline trends, we do not have to pay attention to model those shapes. In addition to the simplicity of modeling baseline curves, we can also nonparametrically describe the baseline trends by using the residuals after the regression coefficients have been estimated.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.279 · 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