MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105004777 · doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxr005

Weighted scores method for regression models with dependent data

2011· article· en· W2105004777 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiostatistics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateCopula (linguistics)StatisticsMathematicsWeightingMultivariate statisticsNegative binomial distributionRegressionRegression analysisInferenceBinomial regressionEconometricsComputer sciencePoisson distributionArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are copula-based statistical models in the literature for regression with dependent data such as clustered and longitudinal overdispersed counts, for which parameter estimation and inference are straightforward. For situations where the main interest is in the regression and other univariate parameters and not the dependence, we propose a "weighted scores method", which is based on weighting score functions of the univariate margins. The weight matrices are obtained initially fitting a discretized multivariate normal distribution, which admits a wide range of dependence. The general methodology is applied to negative binomial regression models. Asymptotic and small-sample efficiency calculations show that our method is robust and nearly as efficient as maximum likelihood for fully specified copula models. An illustrative example is given to show the use of our weighted scores method to analyze utilization of health care based on family characteristics.

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)0.001
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.266
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.159 · 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