Multiple imputation for the analysis of incomplete compound variables
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 In many settings interest lies in modelling a compound variable defined as a function of two or more component variables. When one or more of the components are missing, the compound variable is not observed and a strategy for handling incomplete data is required. Analyses based on individuals with complete data are inefficient and yield potentially inconsistent estimators. We develop a multiple imputation strategy in this setting with an auxiliary model for imputing the compound variable directly, and one based on a multivariate imputation model for the component variables. Asymptotic properties of the imputation‐based estimators are presented for the case in which the imputation model is correctly specified, and a shrinkage estimator is proposed to reduce the bias arising from misspecification of the imputation model. Finite sample properties of the various estimators are examined through simulations. An application to data from the Canadian Youth Smoking Survey involving a study of body mass index illustrates the approach. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 43: 240–264; 2015 © 2015 Statistical Society of Canada
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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