MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080879054 · doi:10.1002/env.876

Spline smoothing in Bayesian disease mapping

2007· article· en· W2080879054 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ying C. MacNab

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloSmoothing splineSpline (mechanical)Bayesian probabilitySmoothingComputer scienceBayesian inferenceEconometricsContext (archaeology)Bayesian hierarchical modelingInferenceSemiparametric modelParametric statisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsGeographySpline interpolationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Penalty splines such as smoothing spline and P‐spline, as well as unpenalized regression splines, have become increasingly popular methods in contemporary non‐parametric and semiparametric regressions, particularly for data arising from longitudinal, multilevel, and spatiotemporal settings. In the recent decade, the development of the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods has facilitated applications of flexible spline fittings via Bayesian hierarchical formulation. In this paper, we study three spline smoothing methods in the context of spatiotemporal modeling of rates and Bayesian disease mapping. We explore their potentials for fully Bayesian (FB) rate and risk trends ensemble estimation and spatiotemporal relative risks inference. In particular, our study presents and compares Bayesian hierarchical formulations of regression B‐spline, smoothing spline, and P‐spline, explores the connections and distinctions among them, and sheds light on their varying capabilities as ‘data‐driven’ smoothers for risk trends exploration and sequential disease mapping. The methods are motivated and illustrated through a Bayesian analysis of adverse medical events (commonly known as iatrogenic injures) to hospitalized children and youth in British Columbia, Canada. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations37
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmetricsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207