MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W303262662 · doi:10.22237/jmasm/1130803620

Testing Goodness Of Fit Of The Geometric Distribution: An Application To Human Fecundability Data

2005· article· en· W303262662 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

VenueJournal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsLikelihood-ratio testGoodness of fitStatisticPearson's chi-squared testTest statisticScore testStatistical hypothesis testingEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A measure of reproduction in human fecundability studies is the number of menstrual cycles required to achieve pregnancy which is assumed to follow a geometric distribution with parameter p. Tests of heterogeneity in the fecundability data through goodness of fit tests of the geometric distribution are developed, along with a likelihood ratio test statistic and a score test statistic. Simulations show both are liberal, and empirical level of the likelihood ratio statistic is larger than that of the score test statistic. A power comparison shows that the likelihood ratio test has a power advantage. A bootstrap p-value procedure using the likelihood ratio statistic is proposed.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.257 · 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