Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In psychiatric and social epidemiology studies, it is common to measure multiple different outcomes using a comprehensive battery of tests thought to be related to an underlying construct of interest. In the research that motivates our work, researchers wanted to assess the impact of in utero alcohol exposure on child cognition and neuropsychological development, which are evaluated using a range of different psychometric tests. Statistical analysis of the resulting multiple outcomes data can be challenging, because the outcomes measured on the same individual are not independent. Moreover, it is unclear, a priori, which outcomes are impacted by the exposure under study. While researchers will typically have some hypotheses about which outcomes are important, a framework is needed to help identify outcomes that are sensitive to the exposure and to quantify the associated treatment or exposure effects of interest. We propose such a framework using a modification of stochastic search variable selection, a popular Bayesian variable selection model and use it to quantify an overall effect of the exposure on the affected outcomes. The performance of the method is investigated empirically and an illustration is given through application using data from our motivating study.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it