MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396883491 · doi:10.1145/3665252.3665266

Technical Perspective: Synthetic Data Needs a Reproducibility Benchmark

2024· article· en· W4396883491 on OpenAlexaff
Xi He

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGMOD Record · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Perspective (graphical)ReproducibilityData miningData scienceDatabaseArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic data is a vital substitute for real sensitive personal data in supporting social science research and policy studies. Extensive prior research has delved into various models for generating synthetic data, from traditional statistical approaches to cutting-edge deep-learning methods. However, selecting the most suitable one for unforeseen applications poses a significant challenge due to the varying strengths and weaknesses, dependent on factors such as the application domain, data distribution, analytical requirements, and privacy considerations.

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)0.153
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.492
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1530.492
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.016
Open science0.0070.008
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainReproducibility
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGMOD RecordSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207