MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789495180 · doi:10.1177/2472555218763608

Statistical Behaviors: Personal and Computer-Aided Observations

2018· article· en· W2789495180 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSLAS DISCOVERY · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticianStatistical analysisPlan (archaeology)PsychologyRadiation oncologyMedical educationMedicineStatisticsRadiation therapyInternal medicineHistoryPathologyMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My early years as a statistician were with the Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group and the Radiation Oncology Therapy Group; three of these years were spent at the Sidney Farber Cancer Institute. Later, I collaborated widely with investigators in many clinical research areas. I reflect on the "statistical interrogations of nature" I saw (and helped some of these) investigators plan and carry out. I look back on their (and my own) statistical behaviors when interpreting the information these interrogations produced and-using a few vignettes and some computer-generated observations-draw some lessons from them. These mainly have to do with making too much of one's data.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.517
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.016 · 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