MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470266840 · doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000000996

Multivariable Regression Models in Clinical Transplant Research

2015· review· en· W2470266840 on OpenAlexaff
Sunita Singh, Bruce Kaplan, S. Joseph Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariable calculusRegressionRegression analysisStatistical hypothesis testingLegitimacyEconometricsSeries (stratigraphy)Statistical modelComputer scienceStatisticsMedicineArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematicsEngineeringBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief The statistical series continues with guidelines for how very large data sets can be mined, and what will determine the legitimacy of the data and the conclusions. These considerations may determine whether a study is hypothesis testing or hypothesis generating.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.421
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207