MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994409524 · doi:10.1080/00031305.2020.1816214

Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Interpreted and Calibrated by Estimating Probabilities of Sign Errors: A Bayes-Frequentist Continuum

2020· article· en· W2994409524 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 American Statistician · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayes factorFrequentist inferencePosterior probabilityBayesian probabilityStatisticsBayes' theoremMathematicsp-valueStatistical hypothesis testingSign (mathematics)Null hypothesisPrior probabilityAlternative hypothesisStatistical powerEconometricsBayesian inferenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypothesis tests are conducted not only to determine whether a null hypothesis (H0) is true but also to determine the direction or sign of an effect. A simple estimate of the posterior probability of a sign error is PSE = (1 – PH0)p/2 + PH0, depending only on a two-sided p-value and PH0, an estimate of the posterior probability of H0. A convenient option for PH0 is the posterior probability derived from estimating the Bayes factor to be its e p ln (1/p) lower bound. In that case, PSE depends only on p and an estimate of the prior probability of H0. PSE provides a continuum between significance testing and traditional Bayesian testing. The former effectively assumes the prior probability of H0 is 0, as some statisticians argue. In that case, PSE is equal to a one-sided p-value. (In that sense, PSE is a calibrated p-value.) In traditional Bayesian testing, on the other hand, the prior probability of H0 is at least 50%, which usually brings PSE close to PH0.

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)0.204
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.204
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.368
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.084 · 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