Variability explained by covariates in linear mixed‐effect models for longitudinal data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Variability explained by covariates or explained variance is a well‐known concept in assessing the importance of covariates for dependent outcomes. In this paper we study R2 statistics of explained variance pertinent to longitudinal data under linear mixed‐effect models, where the R2 statistics are computed at two different levels to measure, respectively, within‐ and between‐subject variabilities explained by the covariates. By deriving the limits of R2 statistics, we find that the interpretation of explained variance for the existing R2 statistics is clear only in the case where the covariance matrix of the outcome vector is compound symmetric. Two new R2 statistics are proposed to address the effect of time‐dependent covariate means. In the general case where the outcome covariance matrix is not compound symmetric, we introduce the concept of compound symmetry projection and use it to define level‐one and level‐two R2 statistics. Numerical results are provided to support the theoretical findings and demonstrate the performance of the R2 statistics. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 38: 352–368; 2010 © 2010 Statistical Society of Canada
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.085 | 0.204 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".