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
Using diverse real-world examples, this text examines what models used for data analysis mean in a specific research context. What assumptions underlie analyses, and how can you check them? Building on the successful 'Data Analysis and Graphics Using R,' 3rd edition (Cambridge, 2010), it expands upon topics including cluster analysis, exponential time series, matching, seasonality, and resampling approaches. An extended look at p-values leads to an exploration of replicability issues and of contexts where numerous p-values exist, including gene expression. Developing practical intuition, this book assists scientists in the analysis of their own data, and familiarizes students in statistical theory with practical data analysis. The worked examples and accompanying commentary teach readers to recognize when a method works and, more importantly, when it doesn't. Each chapter contains copious exercises. Selected solutions, notes, slides, and R code are available online, with extensive references pointing to detailed guides to R.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it