ArticleScientific reports2015
Circular analysis in complex stochastic systems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A conditional likelihood is required to estimate the selection coefficient in ancient DNA.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Predict or classify: The deceptive role of time-locking in brain signal classification.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ruling out observations can lead to wrong models. This danger occurs unwillingly when one selects observations, experiments, simulations or time-series based on their outcome. In stochastic processes, conditioning on the future outcome biases all local transition probabilities and makes them consistent with the selected outcome. This circular self-consistency leads to models that are inconsistent with physical reality. It is also the reason why models built solely on macroscopic observations are prone to this fallacy.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.