MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035107461 · doi:10.1177/0146621620929431

OpenMx: A Modular Research Environment for Item Response Theory Method Development

2020· article· en· W3035107461 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua N. Pritikin, Carl F. Falk

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psychological Measurement · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsModular designComputer scienceImplementationItem response theorySource codeCode (set theory)Selection (genetic algorithm)SoftwareSoftware engineeringTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageMachine learningStatisticsMathematicsPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many item response theory software packages designed for users. Here, the authors introduce an environment tailored to method development and simulation. Implementations of a selection of classic algorithms are available as well as some recently developed methods. Source code is developed in public repositories on GitHub; your collaboration is welcome.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Software
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Software
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1910.076

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 head0.922
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Psychological MeasurementSame topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207