MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986404537 · doi:10.1080/10543406.2010.509527

The Log-Burr XII Regression Model for Grouped Survival Data

2011· article· en· W1986404537 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Elizabeth M. Hashimoto, Edwin M. M. Ortega, Gauss M. Cordeiro, Maurício L. Barreto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsStatisticsJackknife resamplingGrouped dataMathematicsEstimatorData setRegression analysisRegressionMonte Carlo methodEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The log-Burr XII regression model for grouped survival data is evaluated in the presence of many ties. The methodology for grouped survival data is based on life tables, where the times are grouped in k intervals, and we fit discrete lifetime regression models to the data. The model parameters are estimated by maximum likelihood and jackknife methods. To detect influential observations in the proposed model, diagnostic measures based on case deletion, so-called global influence, and influence measures based on small perturbations in the data or in the model, referred to as local influence, are used. In addition to these measures, the total local influence and influential estimates are also used. We conduct Monte Carlo simulation studies to assess the finite sample behavior of the maximum likelihood estimators of the proposed model for grouped survival. A real data set is analyzed using a regression model for grouped data.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.511
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.016 · 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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biopharmaceutical StatisticsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207