MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802142088 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v7n3p105

Decomposition of Parsimonious Independence Model Using Pearson, Kendall and Spearman's Correlations for Two-Way Contingency Tables

2018· article· en· W2802142088 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kiyotaka Iki, Shun Sato, Sadao Tomizawa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContingency tableMathematicsIndependence (probability theory)Linear modelStatisticsDistance correlationLog-linear modelStatisticSpearman's rank correlation coefficientApplied mathematicsEconometricsRandom variable

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For two-way contingency tables with ordered categories, Tomizawa (1992) considered the parsimonious Linear-by-Linear association model. This model can be described in terms of fewer parameters than the Linear-by-Linear association model (Agresti, 1983). The purpose of this paper is (i) to define the parsimonious independence model, (ii) to show the parsimonious independence model holds if and only if the parsimonious Linear-by-Linear association model holds and the each one of various correlation coefficients is equal to zero, and (iii) show the statistic for testing the parsimonious independence model is asymptotically equivalent to the sum of test statistics for the decomposed models.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceFrench-language works237,207