MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945261981 · doi:10.2427/13059

Continuity correction of Pearson’s chi-square test in 2x2 Contingency Tables: A mini-review on recent development

2022· article· en· W2945261981 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

VenueEpidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContingency tablePearson's chi-squared testChi-square testPearson product-moment correlation coefficientStatisticNonparametric statisticsContinuity correctionStatisticsTest (biology)MathematicsTest statisticSquare (algebra)Statistical hypothesis testingCalculus (dental)Poisson distributionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Pearson’s chi-square test represents a nonparametric test more used in Biomedicine and Social Sciences, but it introduces an error for 2x2 contingency tables, when a discrete probability distribution is approximated with a continuous distribution. The first author to introduce the continuity correction of Pearson’s chi-square test has been Yates F. (1934). Unfortunately, Yates’s correction may tend to overcorrect of p-value, this can implicate an overly conservative result. Therefore many authors have introduced variants Pearson’s chi-square statistic, as alternative continuity correction to Yates’s correction. The goal of this paper is to describe the most recent continuity corrections, proposed for Pearson’s chi-square test.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.230 · 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