MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7130675486 · doi:10.1109/swc65939.2025.00307

Generating Synthetic Categorical Data for Causal Modelling of Accessibility Barriers

2025· article· W7130675486 on OpenAlexaff
O. A. Shaposhnyk, Noor Abid, Mouri Zakir, Svetlana Yanushkevich

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableStatistical modelBayesian networkGenerative grammarSynthetic dataProbabilistic logicCopula (linguistics)Causal modelData modelingBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the generation of high-quality synthetic categorical data, such as survey data, using causal graph models. Generating synthetic data aims not only to create a variety of data for training the models but also to preserve privacy while capturing relationships between the data. The research employs Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) followed by Bayesian Networks (BN). We used the categorical data that are based on the survey of accessibility to services for people with disabilities. We created both SEM and BN models to represent causal relationships and to capture joint distributions between variables, such as demographics, types of disability, types of accessibility barriers and frequencies of encountering those barriers. The study compared the SEM-based BN method with alternative approaches, including the probabilistic Gaussian copula technique and generative models like the Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Network (CTGAN). The proposed method outperformed others in statistical metrics, including the Chi-square test, Kullback-Leibler divergence, and Total Variation Distance (TVD). In particular, the BN model demonstrated superior performance, achieving the highest TVD, indicating alignment with the original data. The Gaussian Copula ranked second, while CTGAN exhibited moderate performance. These analyses confirmed the ability of the SEM-based BN to produce synthetic data that maintains statistical and relational validity while preserving data confidentiality.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207