MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016830834 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11549

Optimal balanced block designs for correlated observations

2020· article· en· W3016830834 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Razieh Khodsiani, Saeid Pooladsaz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicOptimal Experimental Design Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrelationBlock (permutation group theory)Binary numberMathematicsValue (mathematics)Optimal designConstant (computer programming)Construct (python library)Block sizeStatisticsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithmCombinatoricsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of universally optimal designs, if such exist, is difficult to obtain, especially when there are some nuisance effects or correlated errors. The hub correlation is a special correlation structure with applications to experiments in genetics, networks and other areas in industry and agriculture. There may be restrictions on the correlation values of the hub structure depending on the experiment. Optimality of block designs under hub correlation has been studied for the case of a constant correlation value. In this article, we consider the hub structure when one of the correlation values is different from the others, and the universally optimal block designs, binary or non‐binary, are theoretically obtained. Also, we introduce an algorithm to construct the optimal designs. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 48: 596–604; 2020 © 2020 Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.044
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.362
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.046 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicOptimal Experimental Design MethodsFrench-language works237,207