MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410674143 · doi:10.1002/qre.2022

Using Bayesian Variable Selection to Analyze Regular Resolution IV Two‐level Fractional Factorial Designs

2016· article· en· W2410674143 on OpenAlexafffund
Hugh Chipman, Michael S. Hamada

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality and Reliability Engineering International · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFractional factorial designSelection (genetic algorithm)Bayesian probabilityMathematicsFactorial experimentVariable (mathematics)StatisticsAliasingFeature selectionComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regular two‐level fractional factorial designs have complete aliasing in which the associated columns of multiple effects are identical. In this article, we show how Bayesian variable selection can be used to analyze experiments that use such designs. Bayesian variable selection naturally incorporates heredity in addition to sparsity and hierarchy. This prior information is used to identify the most likely combinations of active terms. The method is demonstrated on simulated and real experiments. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuality and Reliability Engineering InternationalSame topicOptimal Experimental Design MethodsFrench-language works237,207