MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516573604 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v5n5p55

Construct-focused Configural Invariance for Measures Showing a Multi-dimensional Structure and Application to Exchange Test Data

2016· article· en· W2516573604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Karl Schweizer, Xuezhu Ren, Michael Schreiner

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)Measurement invarianceMetric (unit)Variance (accounting)MathematicsTest (biology)PopulationComponent (thermodynamics)StatisticsEconometricsConfirmatory factor analysisComputer scienceStructural equation modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of construct-focused configural invariance is proposed for investigating the measurement invariance of measures that need to be represented by means of a multi-dimensional model with constrained discriminability. The major characteristic of this concept is the concentration of the investigation of invariance on the component representing the process or processes associated with the construct of interest. This concept enables the exclusion of other components accounting for irrelevant but systematic variance from an investigation. Three large sets of Exchange Test data that differed according to the applied version of the Exchange Test and the population from which the samples originated were investigated according to this concept. Two samples were university students and the third one internet users. It was possible to establish construct-focused configural invariance and corresponding metric invariance for Exchange Test.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFrench-language works237,207