MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381415352 · doi:10.17705/1cais.05229

Recent Developments in PLS

2023· article· en· W4381415352 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications of the Association for Information Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Partial least squares (PLS) path modeling is a widely used method in the information systems (IS) discipline for estimating linear structural equation models. At the same time, researchers have debated its relative merits compared to simple summed scores or to covariance-based estimation of structural equation models. In this paper, we comment on recent developments in PLS to ensure that IS researchers have up-to-date methodological knowledge and best practices if they decide to use PLS. In particular, we briefly review its mechanisms, its well-known properties, and its usage history in IS research. We briefly revisit a high-impact critique and debate a few years ago to identify the critical arguments around current PLS practices and use. That critique proved to be the driver for many advances in the PLS method and its applications which we discuss extensively and use to make 14 recommendations for how and when to use PLS or alternatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
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