MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011025113 · doi:10.2202/1557-4679.1121

IPCW Estimator for Kendall's Tau under Bivariate Censoring

2009· article· en· W2011025113 on OpenAlexafffund
Lajmi Lakhal, Louis‐Paul Rivest, David Beaudoin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Biostatistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsBivariate analysisStatisticsCensoring (clinical trials)Nonparametric statisticsEconometricsConsistent estimatorEfficient estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the nonparametric estimation of Kendall's coefficient of concordance, ?, for measuring the association between two variables under bivariate censoring. The proposed estimator is a modification of the estimator introduced by Oakes (1982), using a Horvitz-Thompson-type correction for the pairs that are not orderable. With censored data, a pair is orderable if one can establish whether the uncensored pair is discordant or concordant using the data available for that pair. Our estimator is shown to be consistent and asymptotically normally distributed. A simulation study shows that the proposed estimator performs well when compared with competing alternatives. The various methods are illustrated with a real data set.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of BiostatisticsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207