MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107480641 · doi:10.1002/bimj.200610379

Inference Methods for the Conditional Logistic Regression Model with Longitudinal Data

2007· article· en· W2107480641 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsLogistic regressionStatisticsEconometricsInferenceLongitudinal dataCross-sectional regressionComputer scienceRegression analysisMathematicsArtificial intelligenceData miningPolynomial regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers inference methods for case-control logistic regression in longitudinal setups. The motivation is provided by an analysis of plains bison spatial location as a function of habitat heterogeneity. The sampling is done according to a longitudinal matched case-control design in which, at certain time points, exactly one case, the actual location of an animal, is matched to a number of controls, the alternative locations that could have been reached. We develop inference methods for the conditional logistic regression model in this setup, which can be formulated within a generalized estimating equation (GEE) framework. This permits the use of statistical techniques developed for GEE-based inference, such as robust variance estimators and model selection criteria adapted for non-independent data. The performance of the methods is investigated in a simulation study and illustrated with the bison data analysis.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.649
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.048 · 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