Variance estimation of the Buckley–James estimator under discrete assumptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Buckley–James estimator (BJE) is a widely recognized approach in dealing with right-censored linear regression models. There have been a lot of discussions in the literature on the estimation of the BJE as well as its asymptotic distribution. So far, no simulation has been done to directly estimate the asymptotic variance of the BJE. Kong and Yu [Asymptotic distributions of the Buckley–James estimator under nonstandard conditions, Statist. Sinica 17 (2007), pp. 341–360] studied the asymptotic distribution under discontinuous assumptions. Based on their methodology, we recalculate and correct some missing terms in the expression of the asymptotic variance in Theorem 2 of their work. We propose an estimator of the standard deviation of the BJE by using plug-in estimators. The estimator is shown to be consistent. The performance of the estimator is accessed through simulation studies under discrete underline distributions. We further extend our studies to several continuous underline distributions through simulation. The estimator is also applied to a real medical data set. The simulation results suggest that our estimation is a good approximation to the true standard deviation with reference to the empirical standard deviation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".