Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Simultaneous confidence intervals constitute a confidence region for a vector of parameters, comprising individual intervals for the separate components, with a coverage confidence level of the simultaneous correctness of all the statements involved. The approach is delineated for multiple comparisons of treatment means with the methods of Bonferroni, Duncan, Scheffé, and Tukey, as specific examples. The applications of simultaneous confidence intervals to the inference of a therapeutic window or the reliability of composite systems necessitate the elucidation of multiple sets of simultaneous confidence intervals. Studies related to condensing infinite sets of simultaneous confidence intervals trigger a discussion on simultaneous confidence bands. Integrating the intrinsic information on the patterns or trends governing a set of simultaneous confidence intervals for the mean responses results in the methodology of range regression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.076 | 0.359 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".