MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060230329 · doi:10.1002/sim.2197

Bias-corrected maximum likelihood estimator of the intraclass correlation parameter for binary data

2005· article· en· W2060230329 on OpenAlexafffund
Krishna K. Saha, S. R. Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStatisticsIntraclass correlationMathematicsEstimatorMaximum likelihoodBinary dataRestricted maximum likelihoodEstimation theoryScore testBinary number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A popular model to analyse over/under-dispersed proportions is to assume the extended beta-binomial model with dispersion (intraclass correlation) parameter phi and then to estimate this parameter by maximum likelihood. However, it is well known that maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) may be biased when the sample size n or the total Fisher information is small. In this paper we obtain a bias-corrected maximum likelihood (BCML) estimator of the intraclass correlation parameter and compare it, by simulation, in terms of bias and efficiency, with the MLE, an estimator Q(2) based on optimal quadratic estimating equations of Crowder and recommended by Paul et al. and a double extended quasi-likelihood (DEQL) estimator proposed by Lee. The BCML estimator has superior bias and efficiency properties in most instances. Analyses of a set of toxicological data from Paul and a set of medical data pertaining to chromosomal abnormalities among survivors of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima from Otake and Prentice show, in general, much improvement in standard errors of the BCML estimates over the other three estimates.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207