On the solution multiplicity of the Fleishman method and its impact in simulation studies
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
The Fleishman third-order polynomial algorithm is one of the most-often used non-normal data-generating methods in Monte Carlo simulations. At the crux of the Fleishman method is the solution of a non-linear system of equations needed to obtain the constants to transform data from normality to non-normality. A rarely acknowledged fact in the literature is that the solution to this system is not unique, and it is currently unknown what influence the different types of solutions have on the computer-generated data. To address this issue, analytical and empirical investigations were conducted, aimed at documenting the impact that each solution type has on the design of computer simulations. In the first study, it was found that certain types of solutions generate data with different multivariate properties and wider coverage of the theoretical range spanned by population correlations. In the second study, it was found that previously published recommendations from Monte Carlo simulations could change if different types of solutions were used to generate the data. A mathematical description of the multiple solutions to the Fleishman polynomials is provided, as well as recommendations for users of this method.
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 | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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