MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089253724 · doi:10.1093/biomet/asq069

Nonparametric estimation for length-biased and right-censored data

2011· article· en· W2089253724 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ching‐Yuan Huang, Jing Qin

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrika · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorNonparametric statisticsTruncation (statistics)Minimum-variance unbiased estimatorStatisticsDelta methodEfficient estimatorConsistent estimatorVariance (accounting)Sample size determinationBias of an estimatorApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers survival data arising from length-biased sampling, where the survival times are left truncated by uniformly distributed random truncation times. We propose a nonparametric estimator that incorporates the information about the length-biased sampling scheme. The new estimator retains the simplicity of the truncation product-limit estimator with a closed-form expression, and has a small efficiency loss compared with the nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator, which requires an iterative algorithm. Moreover, the asymptotic variance of the proposed estimator has a closed form, and a variance estimator is easily obtained by plug-in methods. Numerical simulation studies with practical sample sizes are conducted to compare the performance of the proposed method with its competitors. A data analysis of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging is conducted to illustrate the methods and theory.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.338
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.082 · 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

Citations74
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometrikaSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207