MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096274285 · doi:10.2307/3315854

On quasi‐likelihood inference in generalized linear mixed models with two components of dispersion

2003· article· en· W2096274285 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brajendra C. Sutradhar, R. Prabhakar Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsStatisticsEstimatorQuasi-maximum likelihoodGeneralized linear modelDispersion (optics)Variance componentsGeneralized linear mixed modelMaximum likelihoodMixed modelApplied mathematicsLikelihood functionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors propose a quasi‐likelihood approach analogous to two‐way analysis of variance for the estimation of the parameters of generalized linear mixed models with two components of dispersion. They discuss both the asymptotic and small‐sample behaviour of their estimators, and illustrate their use with salamander mating data.

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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicSurvey Sampling and Estimation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207