$statcheck$ 的设计存在缺陷,没有有效的统计结果拼写检查器

Ingmar Böschen
{"title":"$statcheck$ 的设计存在缺陷,没有有效的统计结果拼写检查器","authors":"Ingmar Böschen","doi":"arxiv-2408.07948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The R package $statcheck$ is designed to extract statistical test results\nfrom text and check the consistency of the reported test statistics and\ncorresponding p-values. Recently, it has also been featured as a spell checker\nfor statistical results, aimed at improving reporting accuracy in scientific\npublications. In this study, I perform a check on $statcheck$ using a\nnon-exhaustive list of 187 simple text strings with arbitrary statistical test\nresults. These strings represent a wide range of textual representations of\nresults including correctly manageable results, non-targeted test statistics,\nvariable reporting styles, and common typos. Since $statcheck$'s detection\nheuristic is tied to a specific set of statistical test results that strictly\nadhere to the American Psychological Association (APA) reporting guidelines, it\nis unable to detect and check any reported result that even slightly deviates\nfrom this narrow style. In practice, $statcheck$ is unlikely to detect many\nstatistical test results reported in the literature. I conclude that the\ncapabilities and usefulness of the $statcheck$ software are very limited and\nthat it should not be used to detect irregularities in results nor as a spell\nchecker for statistical results. Future developments should aim to incorporate\nmore flexible algorithms capable of handling a broader variety of reporting\nstyles, such as those provided by $JATSdecoder$ and Large Language Models,\nwhich show promise in overcoming these limitations but they cannot replace the\ncritical eye of a knowledgeable reader.","PeriodicalId":501215,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - STAT - Computation","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"$statcheck$ is flawed by design and no valid spell checker for statistical results\",\"authors\":\"Ingmar Böschen\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2408.07948\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The R package $statcheck$ is designed to extract statistical test results\\nfrom text and check the consistency of the reported test statistics and\\ncorresponding p-values. Recently, it has also been featured as a spell checker\\nfor statistical results, aimed at improving reporting accuracy in scientific\\npublications. In this study, I perform a check on $statcheck$ using a\\nnon-exhaustive list of 187 simple text strings with arbitrary statistical test\\nresults. These strings represent a wide range of textual representations of\\nresults including correctly manageable results, non-targeted test statistics,\\nvariable reporting styles, and common typos. Since $statcheck$'s detection\\nheuristic is tied to a specific set of statistical test results that strictly\\nadhere to the American Psychological Association (APA) reporting guidelines, it\\nis unable to detect and check any reported result that even slightly deviates\\nfrom this narrow style. In practice, $statcheck$ is unlikely to detect many\\nstatistical test results reported in the literature. I conclude that the\\ncapabilities and usefulness of the $statcheck$ software are very limited and\\nthat it should not be used to detect irregularities in results nor as a spell\\nchecker for statistical results. Future developments should aim to incorporate\\nmore flexible algorithms capable of handling a broader variety of reporting\\nstyles, such as those provided by $JATSdecoder$ and Large Language Models,\\nwhich show promise in overcoming these limitations but they cannot replace the\\ncritical eye of a knowledgeable reader.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - STAT - Computation\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - STAT - Computation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.07948\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - STAT - Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.07948","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

R 软件包 $statcheck$ 设计用于从文本中提取统计检验结果,并检查报告的检验统计量和相应 p 值的一致性。最近,它还被用作统计结果的拼写检查工具,旨在提高科学出版物的报告准确性。在本研究中,我使用一个尚未穷尽的 187 个带有任意统计检验结果的简单文本字符串列表对 $statcheck$ 进行了检查。这些字符串代表了各种结果的文字表述,包括可正确管理的结果、非目标测试统计、多变的报告风格和常见错别字。由于$statcheck$的检测启发式与一组严格遵守美国心理学会(APA)报告指南的特定统计检验结果相联系,因此它无法检测和检查任何报告结果,哪怕是与这种狭隘的风格稍有偏差。实际上,$statcheck$ 不可能检测出文献中报告的许多统计检验结果。我的结论是,$statcheck$ 软件的能力和作用非常有限,它既不能用来检测结果中的不规范之处,也不能作为统计结果的拼写检查器。未来的发展应着眼于纳入更灵活的算法,能够处理更广泛的报告风格,例如 $JATSdecoder$ 和 Large Language Models 提供的算法,它们在克服这些局限性方面显示出前景,但它们无法取代知识渊博的读者的批判性眼光。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
$statcheck$ is flawed by design and no valid spell checker for statistical results
The R package $statcheck$ is designed to extract statistical test results from text and check the consistency of the reported test statistics and corresponding p-values. Recently, it has also been featured as a spell checker for statistical results, aimed at improving reporting accuracy in scientific publications. In this study, I perform a check on $statcheck$ using a non-exhaustive list of 187 simple text strings with arbitrary statistical test results. These strings represent a wide range of textual representations of results including correctly manageable results, non-targeted test statistics, variable reporting styles, and common typos. Since $statcheck$'s detection heuristic is tied to a specific set of statistical test results that strictly adhere to the American Psychological Association (APA) reporting guidelines, it is unable to detect and check any reported result that even slightly deviates from this narrow style. In practice, $statcheck$ is unlikely to detect many statistical test results reported in the literature. I conclude that the capabilities and usefulness of the $statcheck$ software are very limited and that it should not be used to detect irregularities in results nor as a spell checker for statistical results. Future developments should aim to incorporate more flexible algorithms capable of handling a broader variety of reporting styles, such as those provided by $JATSdecoder$ and Large Language Models, which show promise in overcoming these limitations but they cannot replace the critical eye of a knowledgeable reader.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Model-Embedded Gaussian Process Regression for Parameter Estimation in Dynamical System Effects of the entropy source on Monte Carlo simulations A Robust Approach to Gaussian Processes Implementation HJ-sampler: A Bayesian sampler for inverse problems of a stochastic process by leveraging Hamilton-Jacobi PDEs and score-based generative models Reducing Shape-Graph Complexity with Application to Classification of Retinal Blood Vessels and Neurons
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1