Per Family or Familywise Type I Error Control: "Eether, Eyether, Neether, Nyther, Let's Call the Whole Thing Off!"
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frane (2015) pointed out the difference between per-family and familywise Type I error control and how different multiple comparison procedures control one method but not necessarily the other. He then went on to demonstrate in the context of a two group multivariate design containing different numbers of dependent variables and correlations between variables how the per-family rate inflates beyond the level of significance. In this article I reintroduce other newer better methods of Type I error control. These newer methods provide more power to detect effects than the per-family and familywise techniques of control yet maintain the overall rate of Type I error at a chosen level of significance. In particular, I discuss the False Discovery Rate due to Benjamini and Hochberg (1995) and k-Familywise Type I error control enumerated by Lehmann and Romano (2005), Romano and Shaikh (2006), and Sarkar (2008). I conclude the article by referring readers to articles by Keselman, et al. (2011, 2012) which presented R computer code for determining critical significance levels for these newer methods of Type I error control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it