MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329605113 · doi:10.1177/2059799115622746

Log-linear distance models of homophily in small groups

2016· article· en· W2329605113 on OpenAlexaff
Peter J. Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodological Innovations · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime Patterns and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomophilySet (abstract data type)Log-linear modelData setLinear modelGeographical distanceOrder (exchange)EconometricsStatisticsComputer scienceMathematicsPsychologySociologySocial psychologyDemographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article demonstrates the innovative use of the log-linear distance model in the assessment of homophily in a set of small groups, such as the co-participants in a set of events. It traces the development of the application of the log-linear distance model to the study of homophily and reviews its recent use to assess the extent and structure of gender and age homophily in groups of criminal accomplices (‘co-offenders’). The transformations of the group membership data that are a prerequisite of the log-linear analysis, and the interpretation of the log-linear parameters, are explained in detail in order to make the approach accessible to potential users. Although the described applications are to gender and age homophily in groups of criminal accomplices, the method can be used to assess homophily on one or more variables in any small groups.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.579
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.097 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodological InnovationsSame topicCrime Patterns and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207