Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,952 studies31 sourcesUpdated 17 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0Zenodo

P46 Pair-Level Logistic with Congress Random Effects: The Same-Day Effect Is Not a Constant, It Is a Definition (P46 配对级 logistic 与届随机效应:同日效应不是一个常数,是一个口径)

Abstract

Zhang San, validation layer (independent author; public data Voteview HSall rollcalls/votes/members, CC0; 55,958 roll calls, 15,583,833 individual votes, 2,852 members; 176,155,637 candidate pairs, 22,277,154 S pairs, 9,812,898 X pairs; pre-registration written before any P46 outcome variable was computed, informed and directional, not blind; no new data domain). The estimand is the same as P45: Delta equals the same-bill minus cross-bill agreement difference at day gap 0 minus the same difference at day gap 1. Three things change: no cell gating and no shrinkage (raw binomial proportions aggregated to congress by chamber by type by party by gap, plus fine cells), congress enters as a random effect with DerSimonian-Laird tau-squared, REML cross-check and I-squared, and the type axis moves from vote_desc to semantic classes of vote_question (amendment, passage, procedural, nomination, other). Findings. (1) The control group has a larger same-day gradient than the treatment group: S agreement is 65.38 percent at g=0 versus 61.42 at g=1 (+3.96pp), while X agreement is 77.19 versus 68.62 (+8.57pp). The unmatched contrast is therefore -8.47pp (CI [-12.66, -4.28]) and it is measuring the control, not the treatment: same-day same-question cross-bill pairs are largely batched suspension votes, and that batch structure disappears the next day, so X is not the same object at g=0 and g=1. (2) Restricted to fine cells that actually contain S pairs, X's gradient falls to +2.10pp and the contrast becomes +1.03pp (95 percent CI [-2.27, +4.33]), the same sign and size as P45's +2.1pp: P45's number reproduces, but it is indistinguishable from zero and tau = 7.32pp is seven times the point estimate. Per-congress values run from -34.4pp to +44.2pp with 9 of 19 positive. (3) What flips the sign is agenda composition, not time: a weighted regression of per-congress Delta on the share of procedural votes among that congress's S pairs gives slope -0.661 (each 10 points of procedural share lowers the same-day contrast by 6.6pp), intercept -0.063, and residual tau falls from 9.34pp to 0.00pp. The negative congresses (113-116) are procedural-vote dense, the positive ones (112, 117-119) are amendment dense. This is a 19-point association, not a causal claim. (4) S pairs are 96.0 percent amendment sequences (13,661,232 of 14,220,000 at g=0), because a bill has one passage vote but dozens of amendment votes, so every conclusion from P39 to P45 about 'same bill' is in fact a conclusion about amendment sequences; the passage class has only 226 S pairs at g=0 and its contrast cannot be estimated at all, which makes pre-registered H46d structurally unimplementable and that design error is acknowledged. No type survives the congress-cluster criterion: amendment -0.14pp, procedural -2.11pp, other -9.07pp, all CIs crossing zero. (5) On exact ordinal distance within the same day, only d=1 clears zero: +3.55pp (CI [+0.14, +7.21]); d=2 +2.61, d=3 +1.72, d=12 +1.75 (CI [-1.59, +5.26]), so the d=12 bump loses its statistical support and should be deleted from the narrative; d>=25 shows -8 to -9pp with CIs excluding zero but only 6-9 estimable congresses and it is registered, not explained. (6) Estimator diagnostics: the same quantity reads -8.5pp unmatched, +1.0pp fine-cell matched, -0.210 logit unconditional, -0.264 logit additively conditioned; M3b and M1b differ in sign because additive fixed effects forbid the S/X difference from varying across cells while the data say it does, so this quantity cannot be reported as one constant. Instrument bug recorded: the first placebo used (gi*1000003+gj) mod 2, which is equivalent to ordinal-distance parity and produced a false +1.70pp; splitmix hashing gives -0.037pp. Pre-registration: six hypotheses, three pass, two fail, one not fully judgeable, and five of six matched the author's own prior predictions. Reproduction: p46_glmm.py with results JSON and runlog, seed 20261021, 17 seconds. The conclusion is a negative one: the phrase 'same-day effect' is removed from the narrative, and what survives is a single small fact, that the next vote cast on the same day agrees 3.6pp more often.

Related

  1. Reliability Inference in Constant Stress Accelerated Life Tests Based on the Exponentiated Half-Logistic Model
    Tuğçe Hancı, Fatma Gül Akgül
    Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textEurope PMC
  2. Blood biomarkers and penalized logistic regression for the prediction of complicated appendicitis in children: a retrospective cohort study
    Masanaga Matsumoto, Yohei Sanmoto, Kouji Masumoto
    Annals of medicine and surgery (2012)Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  3. Silent Failures in Binary Logistic Regression in the Generative AI Era:How High Kurtosis, Bimodality, Dummy Interactions, and High-Cardinality Encoding Corrupt Statistical Inference and Marketing Decision
    Yasuko Kawahata
    ZenodoPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textZenodo
  4. Prevalence and risk factors of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on multivariate logistic regression
    Zhao Qin, Jun Liao, Xiaoming Peng +3
    Frontiers in endocrinologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEndocrinology & metabolismEurope PMC
  5. How different judgment strategies affect accuracy in generative AI text discrimination: BERT-based clustering and hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression
    Wataru Zaitsu, Mingzhe Jin, Shunichi Ishihara +2
    Frontiers in artificial intelligencePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEurope PMC
BibTeX
@misc{san2026pairlevel,
  title = {{P46 Pair-Level Logistic with Congress Random Effects: The Same-Day Effect Is Not a Constant, It Is a Definition (P46 配对级 logistic 与届随机效应:同日效应不是一个常数,是一个口径)}},
  author = {Zhang San},
  howpublished = {Zenodo},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.5281/zenodo.23536101},
  url = {https://zenodo.org/records/23536101},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - P46 Pair-Level Logistic with Congress Random Effects: The Same-Day Effect Is Not a Constant, It Is a Definition (P46 配对级 logistic 与届随机效应:同日效应不是一个常数,是一个口径)
AU  - Zhang San
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/21
PB  - Zenodo
DO  - 10.5281/zenodo.23536101
UR  - https://zenodo.org/records/23536101
AB  - Zhang San, validation layer (independent author; public data Voteview HSall rollcalls/votes/members, CC0; 55,958 roll calls, 15,583,833 individual votes, 2,852 members; 176,155,637 candidate pairs, 22,277,154 S pairs, 9,812,898 X pairs; pre-registration written before any P46 outcome variable was computed, informed and directional, not blind; no new data domain). The estimand is the same as P45: Delta equals the same-bill minus cross-bill agreement difference at day gap 0 minus the same difference at day gap 1. Three things change: no cell gating and no shrinkage (raw binomial proportions aggregated to congress by chamber by type by party by gap, plus fine cells), congress enters as a random effect with DerSimonian-Laird tau-squared, REML cross-check and I-squared, and the type axis moves from vote_desc to semantic classes of vote_question (amendment, passage, procedural, nomination, other). Findings. (1) The control group has a larger same-day gradient than the treatment group: S agreement is 65.38 percent at g=0 versus 61.42 at g=1 (+3.96pp), while X agreement is 77.19 versus 68.62 (+8.57pp). The unmatched contrast is therefore -8.47pp (CI [-12.66, -4.28]) and it is measuring the control, not the treatment: same-day same-question cross-bill pairs are largely batched suspension votes, and that batch structure disappears the next day, so X is not the same object at g=0 and g=1. (2) Restricted to fine cells that actually contain S pairs, X's gradient falls to +2.10pp and the contrast becomes +1.03pp (95 percent CI [-2.27, +4.33]), the same sign and size as P45's +2.1pp: P45's number reproduces, but it is indistinguishable from zero and tau = 7.32pp is seven times the point estimate. Per-congress values run from -34.4pp to +44.2pp with 9 of 19 positive. (3) What flips the sign is agenda composition, not time: a weighted regression of per-congress Delta on the share of procedural votes among that congress's S pairs gives slope -0.661 (each 10 points of procedural share lowers the same-day contrast by 6.6pp), intercept -0.063, and residual tau falls from 9.34pp to 0.00pp. The negative congresses (113-116) are procedural-vote dense, the positive ones (112, 117-119) are amendment dense. This is a 19-point association, not a causal claim. (4) S pairs are 96.0 percent amendment sequences (13,661,232 of 14,220,000 at g=0), because a bill has one passage vote but dozens of amendment votes, so every conclusion from P39 to P45 about 'same bill' is in fact a conclusion about amendment sequences; the passage class has only 226 S pairs at g=0 and its contrast cannot be estimated at all, which makes pre-registered H46d structurally unimplementable and that design error is acknowledged. No type survives the congress-cluster criterion: amendment -0.14pp, procedural -2.11pp, other -9.07pp, all CIs crossing zero. (5) On exact ordinal distance within the same day, only d=1 clears zero: +3.55pp (CI [+0.14, +7.21]); d=2 +2.61, d=3 +1.72, d=12 +1.75 (CI [-1.59, +5.26]), so the d=12 bump loses its statistical support and should be deleted from the narrative; d>=25 shows -8 to -9pp with CIs excluding zero but only 6-9 estimable congresses and it is registered, not explained. (6) Estimator diagnostics: the same quantity reads -8.5pp unmatched, +1.0pp fine-cell matched, -0.210 logit unconditional, -0.264 logit additively conditioned; M3b and M1b differ in sign because additive fixed effects forbid the S/X difference from varying across cells while the data say it does, so this quantity cannot be reported as one constant. Instrument bug recorded: the first placebo used (gi*1000003+gj) mod 2, which is equivalent to ordinal-distance parity and produced a false +1.70pp; splitmix hashing gives -0.037pp. Pre-registration: six hypotheses, three pass, two fail, one not fully judgeable, and five of six matched the author's own prior predictions. Reproduction: p46_glmm.py with results JSON and runlog, seed 20261021, 17 seconds. The conclusion is a negative one: the phrase 'same-day effect' is removed from the narrative, and what survives is a single small fact, that the next vote cast on the same day agrees 3.6pp more often.
ER  -