Optimal sample size allocation for multi-level stress testing with Weibull regression under Type-II censoring
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
Abstract We discuss the optimal allocation problem in a multi-level stress test with Type-II censoring and Weibull (extreme value) regression model. We derive the maximum-likelihood estimators and their asymptotic variance–covariance matrix through the Fisher information. Four optimality criteria are used to discuss the optimal allocation problem. Optimal allocation of units, both exactly for small sample sizes and asymptotically for large sample sizes, for two- and four-stress-level situations are determined numerically. Conclusions and discussions are provided based on the numerical studies. Keywords: lifetime dataextreme value distributionmaximum-likelihood estimatorsWeibull distributionsurvival analysisaccelerated life testing Acknowledgements The authors thank the Editor, Professor Dr O. Bunke, and an anonymous referee for their critical comments and helpful suggestions, which led to a considerable improvement in the contents as well as the presentation of this manuscript. This research is supported by The Research Grants Council of Hong Kong General Research Fund (project number 2150567) and direct grant of Faculty of Science of the CUHK (project number 2060333).
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 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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