Log Gaussian Cox processes and spatially aggregated disease incidence data
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
This article presents a methodology for modeling aggregated disease incidence data with the spatially continuous log-Gaussian Cox process. Statistical models for spatially aggregated disease incidence data usually assign the same relative risk to all individuals in the same reporting region (census areas or postal regions). A further assumption that the relative risks in two regions are independent given their neighbor's risks (the Markov assumption) makes the commonly used Besag-York-Mollié model computationally simple. The continuous model proposed here uses a data augmentation step to sample from the posterior distribution of the exact locations at each step of an Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm, and models the exact locations with an log-Gaussian Cox process. A simulation study shows the log-Gaussian Cox process model consistently outperforming the Besag-York-Mollié model. The method is illustrated by making inference on the spatial distribution of syphilis risk in North Carolina. The effect of several known social risk factors are estimated, and areas with risk well in excess of that expected given these risk factors are identified.
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 | 0.028 | 0.619 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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