MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810242367 · doi:10.1177/1536867x1801800109

Fitting and Interpreting Correlated Random-coefficient Models Using Stata

2018· article· en· W2810242367 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

VenueThe Stata Journal Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorInterpretation (philosophy)Random effects modelEstimationEconometricsStatisticsComputer scienceSample (material)MathematicsPanel dataEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we introduce the community-contributed command randcoef, which fits the correlated random-effects and correlated random-coefficient models discussed in Suri (2011, Econometrica 79: 159–209). While this approach has been around for a decade, its use has been limited by the computationally intensive nature of the estimation procedure that relies on the optimal minimum distance estimator. randcoef can accommodate up to five rounds of panel data and offers several options, including alternative weight matrices for estimation and inclusion of additional endogenous regressors. We also present postestimation analysis using sample data to facilitate understanding and interpretation of results.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.203 · 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