MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055194910 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11236

Non‐parametric generalized linear mixed models in small area estimation

2015· article· en· W2055194910 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch ManitobaManitoba Health Research Council
KeywordsSmall area estimationCovariateStatisticsGeneralized linear mixed modelEstimationMixed modelSpline (mechanical)Linear modelMathematicsLinear regressionParametric statisticsEconometricsRegression analysisComputer scienceEngineeringEstimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mixed models are commonly used for the analysis of small area estimation. In particular, small area estimation has been extensively studied under linear mixed models. Recently, small area estimation under the linear mixed model with penalized spline (P‐spline) regression model, for fixed part of the model, has been proposed. However, in practice there are many situations that we have counts or proportions in small areas; for example a dataset on the number of asthma physician visits in small areas in Manitoba. In particular, the covariates age, genetic, environmental factors, among other covariates seem to predict asthma physician visits, however, these relationships may not be linear (see Section 5). In this paper, small area estimation under generalized linear mixed models using P‐spline regression models is proposed to cover Normal and non‐Normal responses. In particular, the empirical best predictor of small area parameters with corresponding prediction intervals are studied. The performance of the proposed approach is evaluated through simulation studies and also by a real dataset. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 43: 82–96; 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.102 · 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