MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251110819 · doi:10.1002/9780470057339.val015

Logarithmic Regression

2006· other· en· W4251110819 on OpenAlexaff
A El-Shaarawi, R. Viveros

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Environmetrics · 2006
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsLinear regressionRegression analysisLogarithmRegressionMathematicsPopularitySimplicityEconometricsSoftwareComputer sciencePsychologyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Log regression (LR) is widely used to model environmental data because the measurements tend to show positively skewed frequency curves and higher variability with higher concentration levels. A compelling reason for the popularity of LR is the simplicity of estimating and making inferences about the regression coefficients using existing software packages for the normal theory linear models.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0960.089

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

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

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of EnvironmetricsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207