MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

BOOK REVIEWS: 2

2004· article· en· W4238323837 on OpenAlexaffabout
Olaf Berke

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationLibrary sciencePopulationMedicineFamily medicineComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book gives a fresh approach to the topic of categorical data analysis. The presentation of the statistical methods exploits the connection to regression modeling with a focus on practical features rather than formal theory. However, I am in doubt whether the regression approach of categorical data analysis is more intuitive than the approach that starts with contingency tables (see, e.g., Agresti, 1996). Surely, this may depend on the readers themselves. Epidemiologists thinking in fourfold tables may find the regression approach harder to understand than econometricians. The author discusses the various aspects of statistical modeling, i.e., model selection, checking the modeling assumptions, and points the reader to applied problems such as outliers and sparse cell counts in contingency tables. Finally, the reader is given an interpretation of analytical results along with real-world examples. And all this is done in a readable way, especially as the references are avoided in the main text body and discussed at the end of each chapter. The text is broken down into three main parts. The first part gives a prerequisite for the following by reviewing Gaussian-based data analysis and model building. The second part examines the modeling of count data. This includes count regression models such as Poisson regression and negative binomial models and log-linear models for contingency tables. Lastly, the third part of the book discusses logistic regression and alternative models for binary data, as well as extensions for multinomial and ordinal response variables. As emphasized by the title “Analyzing Categorical Data,” this is not a reference, but a textbook. The author makes use of many worked-out real data examples. The data and the computer code for analysis of the examples presented throughout the book are available to the reader via the Internet. The target audience is anyone faced with categorical data, ranging from undergraduate to Ph.D. students to professional data analysts in diverse fields including econometrics, sociology, and management, as well as biometrics and epidemiology. There is much to learn from this book. Aside from the ordinary materials such as association diagrams, Mantel–Haenszel estimators, or overdispersion, the reader will also find some less-often presented but interesting and stimulating topics. Among these is the “mosaic plot” for graphically representing association in contingency tables or “Benford's law” for anomalous numbers. However, from a personal point of view the book is missing here and there a few more pieces of information. For example, rules of thumb for the validity of asymptotic inference, e.g., when can we approximate the binomial by the normal distribution, and when do we need Fisher's exact test, and cannot use the Pearson χ2-statistic. Furthermore, the text does not address the analysis of dependent or clustered data. The presentation is restricted to fixed effects models, e.g., random coefficient and mixed models approaches such as GLMM (generalized linear mixed models) and GEE (generalized estimation equations) are not dealt with. For an introductory text, one might think that these topics can be excluded, but I wished that at least a discussion of these important aspects of analyzing categorical data would have been given in the form of an outlook chapter at the end. The interested reader may then consult a book with a broader scope such as Agresti (2002), or more specialized books such as Hosmer and Lemeshow (2000) or Diggle et al. (2002). Despite this, I think this is an excellent book, giving an up-to-date introduction to the wide field of analyzing categorical data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4550.430

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207