{"id":"W2076470657","doi":"10.1016/j.jspi.2011.03.026","title":"On the robustness of maximum composite likelihood estimate","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference","topic":"Advanced Statistical Methods and Models","field":"Mathematics","cited_by":91,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Mathematics; Robustness (evolution); Multivariate statistics; Likelihood function; Maximum likelihood; Quasi-maximum likelihood; Statistics; Marginal likelihood; Composite number; Consistency (knowledge bases); Applied mathematics; Econometrics; Algorithm","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08265501,0.002380549,0.005059658,0.005086063,0.002173855,0.00659789,0.007182586,0.005010691,0.006543728],"category_scores_gemma":[0.4839072,0.002723436,0.003523251,0.004234588,0.008510699,0.01088367,0.009367839,0.009089121,0.001281411],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002302062,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002691246,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004649459,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001711654,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9498919,0.03679975,0.002040487,0.005488154,0.004802395,0.0009773144],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.3226233,0.6372021,0.008459277,0.02155199,0.008582246,0.001581142],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"methods","domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002056707,0.0001265218,0.01045355,0.0009556341,0.001575657,0.000631155,0.0006309404,0.4046409,0.001937367,0.4867545,0.005328655,0.0849085],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001074985,0.0001335762,0.001864095,0.0001694773,0.0001874904,0.0002276258,0.00008096602,0.6212371,0.001478341,0.3718452,0.002564684,0.0001039606],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","genre_scores_codex":[0.009692113,0.0009706265,0.9841373,0.001158752,0.0001540272,0.00005531872,0.0002470477,0.000365862,0.003218938],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5269759,0.002357935,0.4587584,0.001540083,0.001685695,0.0005651336,0.0019064,0.001945372,0.004265192],"genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","teacher_disagreement_score":0.917345,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4371267,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.166988026560952,"score_gpt":0.4196647308178981,"score_spread":0.252676704256946,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}