MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Multistate Model for Bivariate Interval‐Censored Failure Time Data

2008· article· en· W2025742107 on OpenAlexaff
Richard J. Cook, Leilei Zeng, Ker‐Ai Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivariate analysisInterval (graph theory)StatisticsComputer scienceEconometricsAccelerated failure time modelBivariate dataMathematicsSurvival analysisCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY: Interval-censored life-history data arise when the events of interest are only detectable at periodic assessments. When interest lies in the occurrence of two such events, bivariate-interval censored event time data are obtained. We describe how to fit a four-state Markov model useful for characterizing the association between two interval-censored event times when the assessment times for the two events may be generated by different inspection processes. The approach treats the two events symmetrically and enables one to fit multiplicative intensity models that give estimates of covariate effects as well as relative risks characterizing the association between the two events. An expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm is described for estimation in which the maximization step can be carried out with standard software. The method is illustrated by application to data from a trial of HIV patients where the events are the onset of viral shedding in the blood and urine among individuals infected with cytomegalovirus.

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)0.019
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 score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.090 · 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

Citations34
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207