MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300165600 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511605949

Cause and Correlation in Biology

2000· book· en· W4300165600 on OpenAlexaff
Bill Shipley

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCausationJargonContext (archaeology)EpistemologyTest (biology)Causality (physics)Statistical hypothesis testingComputer sciencePsychologyMathematicsLinguisticsStatisticsHistoryBiologyPhilosophyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aimed at practising biologists, especially graduate students and researchers in ecology, this revised and expanded 3rd edition continues to explore cause-effect relationships through a series of robust statistical methods. Every chapter has been updated, and two brand-new chapters cover statistical power, Akaike information criterion statistics and equivalent models, and piecewise structural equation modelling with implicit latent variables. A new R package (pwSEM) is included to assist with the latter. The book offers advanced coverage of essential topics, including d-separation tests and path analysis, and equips biologists with the tools needed to carry out analyses in the open-source R statistical environment. Writing in a conversational style that minimises technical jargon, Shipley offers an accessible text that assumes only a very basic knowledge of introductory statistics, incorporating real-world examples that allow readers to make connections between biological phenomena and the underlying statistical concepts.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations866
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207