On the Accuracy of Efficiency of Estimating Equation Approach
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
Liang and Zeger (1986, Biometrika 73, 13-22) introduced a generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach based on a working correlation matrix to obtain efficient estimators of regression parameters in the class of generalized linear models for repeated measures data. As demonstrated by Crowder (1995, Biometrika 82, 407-410), because of uncertainty of the definition of the working correlation matrix, the Liang-Zeger approach may, in some cases, lead to a complete breakdown of the estimation of the regression parameters. After taking this comment of Crowder into account, recently Sutradhar and Das (1999, Biometrika 86, 459-465) examined the loss of efficiency of the regression estimators due to misspecification of the correlation structures. But their study was confined to the regression estimation with cluster-level covariates, as in the original paper of Liang and Zeger. In this paper, we study this efficiency loss problem for the generalized regression models with within-cluster covariates by utilizing the approach of Sutradhar and Das (1999).
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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