MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2341066319 · doi:10.32614/rj-2013-004

Hypothesis Tests for Multivariate Linear Models Using the car Package

2013· article· en· W2341066319 on OpenAlexafffund
John Fox, Michael Friendly, Sanford Weisberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe R Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityMcMaster University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsR packageMultivariate analysisEconometricsComputer scienceGeneralized linear modelStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multivariate linear model can be fit with the lm function in R, where the left-hand side of the model comprises a matrix of response variables, and the right-hand side is specified exactly as for a univariate linear model (i.e., with a single response variable). This paper explains how to use the Anova and linearHypothesis functions in the car package to perform convenient hypothesis tests for parameters in multivariate linear models, including models for repeated-measures data.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.130
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.130
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.018

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations259
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe R JournalSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207