MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1501432958 · doi:10.1214/lnms/1215091952

Score tests for dependent censoring with survival data

2003· book-chapter· en· W1501432958 on OpenAlexaff
Mériem Saïd, Nadia Ghazzali, Louis‐Paul Rivest

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes-monograph series · 2003
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)Weibull distributionStatisticsParametric statisticsCopula (linguistics)MathematicsExponential functionExponential distributionParametric modelAccelerated failure time modelSurvival analysisEconometricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a standard survival data analysis, the observed time is the minimum of the survival time T and a censoring time independent of T. In this paper, we consider models featuring two censoring times U and V.The distribution of U is possibly related with that of T, while the second censoring time V is independent of both T and U.These models involve an Archimedean copula to incorporate a possible dependency between T and U. Score tests for dependent censoring are derived when a parametric model, e.g.Weibull or exponential, is assumed for T. One is fully parametric; it assumes that the marginal distributions of T, U, and V are either exponential or Weibull.The other is semiparametric; no assumptions are made on neither U nor V. The relative efficiencies of these two tests are compared with that of tests involving uncensored data.A numerical example is presented.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.135
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.135
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes-monograph seriesSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207