Mapping socio-economic status using mixed data: a hierarchical Bayesian approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate a socio-economic status (SES) index based on mixed dichotomous and continuous variables. In particular, we extend Quinn’s ([2004]. Bayesian factor analysis for mixed ordinal and continuous responses. Political Analysis, 12(4), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mph022) and Schliep and Hoeting’s ([2013]. Multilevel latent Gaussian process model for mixed discrete and continuous multivariate response data. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 18(4), 492–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-013-0136-z) factor analysis models for mixed dichotomous and continuous variables by allowing a spatial hierarchical structure of key parameters of the model. Unlike most SES assessment models proposed in the literature, the hierarchical nature of this model enables the use of census observations at the household level without needing to aggregate any information a priori. Therefore, it better accommodates the variability of the SES between census tracts and the number of households per area. The proposed model is used in the estimation of a socio-economic index using 10% of the 2010 Ghana census in the Greater Accra Metropolitan area. Out of the 20 observed variables, the number of people per room, access to water piping and flushable toilets differentiated high and low SES areas the best.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".