MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995765051 · doi:10.1002/cjs.5550350204

Goodness‐of‐fit tests for parametric models in censored regression

2007· article· en· W1995765051 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan Carlos Pardo–Fernández, Ingrid Van Keilegom, Wenceslao González–Manteiga

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoodness of fitStatisticsParametric statisticsMathematicsKolmogorov–Smirnov testNonparametric statisticsRegression analysisMonte Carlo methodParametric modelStatistical hypothesis testingNonparametric regressionEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors propose a goodness‐of‐fit test for parametric regression models when the response variable is right‐censored. Their test compares an estimation of the error distribution based on parametric residuals to another estimation relying on nonparametric residuals. They call on a bootstrap mechanism in order to approximate the critical values of tests based on Kolmogorov‐Smirnov and Cramér‐von Mises type statistics. They also present the results of Monte Carlo simulations and use data from a study about quasars to illustrate their work.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.378
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.378
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207