MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1033461596 · doi:10.20381/ruor-16230

Logistic regression for the modeling of low-dose radiation effects.

2000· dissertation· en· W1033461596 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gavin Kenneth. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiative Heat Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionStatisticsLow Dose RadiationEconometricsMedicineMathematicsInternal medicineDose–response relationship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary goal of this thesis is to examine statistical procedures that determine if a nonlinear threshold dose effect occurs in cancer incidence in animal experiments. This is to say, does there exist a level of radiation which does not increase the risk of cancer in animals? This question will be explored on data over several species of animals (beagles, rats, and mice) and several different sources of radiation (e.g. radium, or plutonium). Here we consider experiments with several groups of animals at several dose levels In mathematical terms, this thesis will determine if a "knee" fit to a logistic regression models the data better than a simple logistic regression curve. The knee is a non-linear kink in the dose response relationship at a specific dose. If there is evidence to support the knee model hypothesis, it can be interpreted to mean that there is evidence of a threshold effect in the dose response. A secondary goal is to determine if two knees will suffice for data sets of this nature. The motivation behind this goal, is that a two knee model should be able to model both a low dose threshold and a high dose drop-off (due to over exposure to radiation, past the Maximally Tolerated Dose, MTD). Any knees above two will generally only contribute to overfitting of the model. Another goal is to give guidelines on the design of experiments, that will assist researchers in determining if a threshold does in fact exist.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicRadiative Heat Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207