MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036745105 · doi:10.5539/ijsp.v9n4p62

Overcoming Limitations of the Independent Clusters Model for CFA by Means of Bayes-Estimation and Buffered Simple Structure

2020· article· en· W3036745105 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
André Beauducel, Norbert Hilger

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics and Probability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayes' theoremPopulationMathematicsStatisticsSimple (philosophy)Bayes factorFactor analysisSampling (signal processing)Sample size determinationBayesian probabilityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The model of buffered simple structure is discussed as a method for modeling cross-loadings in confirmatory factor analysis. This method introduces assumptions from item sampling theory into confirmatory factor analysis. The independent clusters model, buffered simple structure, and Bayes estimation were compared by means of a simulation study based on three different population types. Population type A had zero cross-loadings, population type B had symmetrically distributed nonzero cross-loadings, and population type C had asymmetrically distributed nonzero cross-loadings. It turned out for population A that, although the independent clusters model yields the best loading estimate, it did not outperform Bayes estimation and buffered simple structure with respect to the factor inter-correlation estimate and model fit. One reason for this unexpected result could be that the specification of zero-cross loadings is suboptimal even when only sampling error introduces some cross-loadings. For populations B and C Bayes estimation and buffered simple structure clearly outperformed the independent clusters model. Overall, the results indicate that depending on the structure of cross-loadings in the population and depending on the focus on loading estimates or factor inter-correlation estimates, different modeling approaches might be appropriate.

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 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)0.050
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.332
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.083 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics and ProbabilitySame topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207