MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079100487 · doi:10.1080/03610926.2013.813051

Confidence Intervals for Quantiles of a Two-parameter Exponential Distribution under Progressive Type-II Censoring

2015· article· en· W2079100487 on OpenAlexaff
N. Balakrishnan, Anthony J. Hayter, Wei Liu, Seksan Kiatsupaibul

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)Confidence intervalCDF-based nonparametric confidence intervalQuantileStatisticsRobust confidence intervalsMathematicsConfidence distributionConfidence regionCredible intervalBinomial proportion confidence intervalTolerance intervalExponential distributionEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confidence intervals for the pth-quantile Q of a two-parameter exponential distribution provide useful information on the plausible range of Q, and only inefficient equal-tail confidence intervals have been discussed in the statistical literature so far. In this article, the construction of the shortest possible confidence interval within a family of two-sided confidence intervals is addressed. This shortest confidence interval is always shorter, and can be substantially shorter, than the corresponding equal-tail confidence interval. Furthermore, the computational intensity of both methodologies is similar, and therefore it is advantageous to use the shortest confidence interval. It is shown how the results provided in this paper can apply to data obtained from progressive Type II censoring, with standard Type II censoring as a special case. The applications of more complex confidence interval constructions through acceptance set inversions that can employ prior information are also discussed.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207