Bibliographic record
Abstract
Welcome to the world of statistical programming. This book will contain a lot of specific advice about the hows and whys of the subject. We start in this chapter by giving you an idea of what statistical programming is all about. We will also tell you what to expect as you proceed through the rest of the book. The chapter will finish with some instructions about how to download and install R, the software package and language on which we base our programming examples. What is statistical programming? Computer programming involves controlling computers, telling them what calculations to do, what to display, etc. Statistical programming is harder to define. One definition might be that it's the kind of computer programming statisticians do – but statisticians do all sorts of programming. Another would be that it's the kind of programming one does when one is doing statistics – but again, statistics involves a wide variety of computing tasks. For example, statisticians are concerned with collecting and analyzing data, and some statisticians would be involved in setting up connections between computers and laboratory instruments – but we would not call that statistical programming. Statisticians often oversee data entry from questionnaires, and may set up programs to aid in detecting data entry errors. That is statistical programming, but it is quite specialized, and beyond the scope of this book.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.307 | 0.279 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".