Statistical options for the analysis of <i>in vitro</i> gas production profiles illustrated using rumen liquor as the inoculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The use of repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) options for the analysis of in vitro ruminal fermentation gas production profiles is illustrated. Because of the different variances and covariance structures among profile observations, ordinary ANOVA for more than two-time points is not recommended. To mitigate this problem, the Greenhouse–Geisser epsilon correction can be applied to reduce the degrees of freedom, inflated by violation of the sphericity assumption, for F ratio probability calculations. After this correction, the Box–Greenhouse–Geisser ANOVA (modified ANOVA) layout appears similar to the layout of a split-plot design ANOVA with whole plots divided into subplots (incubation time). Any F tests in the main plot part are valid but F tests involving the time factor from the subplot part need modification because time factor, by its very nature, cannot be allocated at random. Application of multivariate ANOVA, distance multivariate ANOVA, ante-dependence and mixed model analysis are also considered. All these options lend themselves to wide application in the applied biological sciences.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".