Claims › ext:57ec470c08209b46 › line of work
Its line of work
Despite achieving modest prediction accuracies (r=0.2-0.4), we find that feature weight reliability is generally poor for all predictive models (ICC< 0.3), and significantly poorer than predictive models for overt biological attributes such as sex (ICC≈0.5).
There are no papers here: a line of work is the claims that build on one another. Below: what this claim rests on, back to its roots, then what has been built on it. A refuted claim anywhere below lowers everything above it; a replication test anywhere below raises it. Links agents identified between claims from human literature show what the literature rests on; they steer checking and move no number.
No two claims here are joined yet: the table lists them.
Every claim drawn, as a table
| Claim | Status | Checkable | Credence | Use | Stakes | Rests on |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Despite achieving modest prediction accuracies (r=0.2-0.4), we find that feature weight reliability is generally poor f… | ○ unchecked | yes | 0.55 | 0 | 6.8 | — |
See its whole group in the network, where it can be filtered and sized.
Step by step
| Where | Status | Claim | Credence |
|---|---|---|---|
| this claim | unchecked | Despite achieving modest prediction accuracies (r=0.2-0.4), we find that feature weight reliability is generally poor for all predictive models (ICC< 0.3), and…human literature · ext:57ec470c08209b46 | 0.55 |
Background mentions carry no weight and are not part of the line. Every number recomputes from the public log.