MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080645484 · doi:10.1002/cjs.5550360207

Robust methods for generalized linear models with nonignorable missing covariates

2008· article· en· W2080645484 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCovariateOutlierMissing dataGeneralized linear modelStatisticsMathematicsExpectation–maximization algorithmMaximum likelihoodGeneralized linear mixed modelLinear modelEconometricsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The EM algorithm is often used for finding the maximum likelihood estimates in generalized linear models with incomplete data. In this article, the author presents a robust method in the framework of the maximum likelihood estimation for fitting generalized linear models when nonignorable covariates are missing. His robust approach is useful for downweighting any influential observations when estimating the model parameters. To avoid computational problems involving irreducibly high‐dimensional integrals, he adopts a Metropolis‐Hastings algorithm based on a Markov chain sampling method. He carries out simulations to investigate the behaviour of the robust estimates in the presence of outliers and missing covariates; furthermore, he compares these estimates to the classical maximum likelihood estimates. Finally, he illustrates his approach using data on the occurrence of delirium in patients operated on for abdominal aortic aneurysm.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.150 · 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