Semiparametric estimation for the additive hazards model with left-truncated and right-censored data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival data from prevalent cases collected under a cross-sectional sampling scheme are subject to left-truncation. When fitting an additive hazards model to left-truncated data, the conditional estimating equation method (Lin & Ying, 1994), obtained by modifying the risk sets to account for left-truncation, can be very inefficient, as the marginal likelihood of the truncation times is not used in the estimation procedure. In this paper, we use a pairwise pseudolikelihood to eliminate nuisance parameters from the marginal likelihood and, by combining the marginal pairwise pseudo-score function and the conditional estimating function, propose an efficient estimator for the additive hazards model. The proposed estimator is shown to be consistent and asymptotically normally distributed with a sandwich-type covariance matrix that can be consistently estimated. Simulation studies show that the proposed estimator is more efficient than its competitors. A data analysis illustrates application of the method.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it