MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013348093 · doi:10.1214/11-bjps165

Predicting dependent binary outcomes through logistic regressions and meta-elliptical copulas

2013· article· en· W2013348093 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christian Genest, Aristidis K. Nikoloulopoulos, Louis‐Paul Rivest, Mathieu Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Probability and Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)MathematicsStatisticsEconometricsPairwise comparisonCovariateLogistic regressionTest statisticStatisticResidualStatistical hypothesis testingAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors consider copula models for vectors of binary response variables having marginal distributions that depend on covariates through logistic regressions. They show how to test for residual pairwise dependence between responses, given the explanatory variables. The procedure they propose is based on the score statistic derived from the assumed copula structure under the alternative. The authors further argue that conditional dependence can be conveniently modelled with meta-elliptical copulas, which offer a wide range of positive and negative degrees of association. They call on a composite likelihood to estimate the copula parameters and they provide standard error estimates of the same via linearization. They illustrate their results with Canadian data on the presence or absence of various log grades in trees.

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)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of Probability and StatisticsSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207