MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085979905 · doi:10.1155/2011/937574

Gamma Kernel Estimators for Density and Hazard Rate of Right‐Censored Data

2011· article· en· W2085979905 on OpenAlexafffund
Taoufik Bouezmarni, Anouar El Ghouch, Mhamed Mesfioui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Probability and Statistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsRate of convergenceKernel (algebra)Kernel density estimationMean squared errorStatisticsApplied mathematicsKernel smootherBoundary (topology)SmoothingDensity estimationHazard ratioKernel methodMathematical analysisConfidence intervalCombinatoricsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nonparametric estimation for the density and hazard rate functions for right‐censored data using the kernel smoothing techniques is considered. The “classical” fixed symmetric kernel type estimator of these functions performs well in the interior region, but it suffers from the problem of bias in the boundary region. Here, we propose new estimators based on the gamma kernels for the density and the hazard rate functions. The estimators are free of bias and achieve the optimal rate of convergence in terms of integrated mean squared error. The mean integrated squared error, the asymptotic normality, and the law of iterated logarithm are studied. A comparison of gamma estimators with the local linear estimator for the density function and with hazard rate estimator proposed by Müller and Wang (1994), which are free from boundary bias, is investigated by simulations.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Probability and StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207