MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498254812 · doi:10.1080/10705511.2016.1207180

Analysis of Correlation Matrices Using Scale-Invariant Common Principal Component Models and a Hierarchy of Relationships Between Correlation Matrices

2016· article· en· W2498254812 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisInvariant (physics)CorrelationMathematicsScale (ratio)Scale invarianceApplied mathematicsHierarchyStatisticsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we demonstrate that the scale-invariant common principal component (CPC) model previously developed in the literature is in fact not scale invariant and cannot be used to analyze correlation matrices. To fill this gap, the correct formulation of the scale-invariant CPC model is provided, and an offspring scale-invariant CPC model is defined. Based on a series of scale-invariant CPC models, a hierarchy of relationships between correlation matrices is established. We illustrate the proposed scale-invariant CPC models with two numeric examples, and spend efforts on the interpretation of the common PCs in the second example. Some suggestions are given at the end regarding the software implementation of the scale-invariant CPC models.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.196 · 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