MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nested Generalized Linear Mixed Models: An Orthodox Best Linear Unbiased Predictor Approach

2007· article· en· W2010547933 on OpenAlexafffund
Renjun Ma, Bent Jørgensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorApplied mathematicsBest linear unbiased predictionGeneralized linear mixed modelGeneralized linear modelRange (aeronautics)InferenceExponential functionLinear regressionParametric statisticsLinear modelExponential familyStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We introduce a new class of generalized linear mixed models based on the Tweedie exponential dispersion model distributions, accommodating a wide range of discrete, continuous and mixed data. Using the best linear unbiased predictor of random effects, we obtain an optimal estimating function for the regression parameters in the sense of Godambe, allowing an efficient common fitting algorithm for the whole class. Although allowing full parametric inference, our main results depend only on the first- and second-moment assumptions of unobserved random effects. In addition, we obtain consistent estimators for both regression and dispersion parameters. We illustrate the method by analysing the epilepsy data and cake baking data. Along with simulations and asymptotic justifications, this shows the usefulness of the method for analysis of clustered non-normal 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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations63
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology)Same topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207