MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970624021 · doi:10.1080/02331880701878374

On the estimation of reliabilty function in a Weibull lifetime distribution

2008· article· en· W1970624021 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Baklizi, S. Ejaz Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsStatisticsWeibull distributionShrinkage estimatorPoint estimationBias of an estimatorEfficient estimatorConsistent estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimatorApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The estimation of the reliability function of the Weibull lifetime model is considered in the presence of uncertain prior information (not in the form of prior distribution) on the parameter of interest. This information is assumed to be available in some sort of a realistic conjecture. In this article, we focus on how to combine sample and non-sample information together in order to achieve improved estimation performance. Three classes of point estimatiors, namely, the unrestricted estimator, the shrinkage estimator and shrinkage preliminary test estimator (SPTE) are proposed. Their asymptotic biases and mean-squared errors are derived and compared. The relative dominance picture of the estimators is presented. Interestingly, the proposed SPTE dominates the unrestricted estimator in a range that is wider than that of the usual preliminary test estimator. A small-scale simulation experiment is used to examine the small sample properties of the proposed estimators. Our simulation investigations have provided strong evidence that corroborates with asymptotic theory. The suggested estimation methods are applied to a published data set to illustrate the performance of the estimators in a real-life situation.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatisticsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207