MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123718732 · doi:10.1002/cjs.5540330104

Local likelihood density estimation for interval censored data

2005· article· en· W2123718732 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John R. Braun, Thierry Duchesne, James E. Stafford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité LavalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsEstimationInterval (graph theory)Maximum likelihoodDensity estimationEconometricsMathematicsInterval estimationConfidence intervalComputer scienceEconomicsEstimatorCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors propose a class of procedures for local likelihood estimation from data that are either interval-censored or that have been aggregated into bins. One such procedure relies on an algorithm that generalizes existing self-consistency algorithms by introducing kernel smoothing at each step of the iteration. The entire class of procedures yields estimates that are obtained as solutions of fixed point equations. By discretizing and applying numerical integration, the authors use fixed point theory to study convergence of algorithms for the class. Rapid convergence is effected by the implementation of a local EM algorithm as a global Newton iteration. The latter requires an explicit solution of the local likelihood equations which can be found by using the symbolic Newton-Raphson algorithm, if necessary.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations49
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207