MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W261013088 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.24.002

A Promising New Approach to Eliminating Selection Bias

2009· article· en· W261013088 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laura R. Peck, Furio Camillo, Ida D’Attoma

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Causal Inference Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Variance (accounting)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Selection biasTransformation (genetics)EconometricsData scienceData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article presents a creative and practical process for dealing with the problem of selection bias. Taking an algorithmic approach and capitalizing on the known treatment-associated variance in the X matrix, we propose a data transformation that allows estimating unbiased treatment effects. The approach does not call for modelling the data, based on underlying theories or assumptions about the selection process, but instead calls for using the existing variability within the data and letting the data speak. We illustrate with an application of the method to Italian Job Centres.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.544
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.040 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesFrench-language works237,207