MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124859557 · doi:10.1080/03610920902866966

Inference for a Simple Step-Stress Model with Type-I Censoring and Lognormally Distributed Lifetimes

2009· article· en· W2124859557 on OpenAlexafffund
N. Balakrishnan, Li Zhang, Qihao Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and Methods · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsBombardier (Canada)McMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCensoring (clinical trials)EstimatorInferenceResamplingAccelerated life testingApplied mathematicsStatistical inferenceMonte Carlo methodMathematicsParametric statisticsDelta methodMaximum likelihoodComputer scienceMaximum likelihood sequence estimationStatisticsWeibull distributionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerated life-testing (ALT) is a very useful technique for examining the reliability of highly reliable products. It allows the experimenter to obtain failure data more quickly at increased stress levels than under normal operating conditions. A step-stress model is one special class of ALT, and in this article we consider a simple step-stress model under the cumulative exposure model with lognormally distributed lifetimes in the presence of Type-I censoring. We then discuss inferential methods for the unknown parameters of the model by the maximum likelihood estimation method. Some numerical methods, such as the Newton–Raphson and quasi-Newton methods, are discussed for solving the corresponding non-linear likelihood equations. Next, we discuss the construction of confidence intervals for the unknown parameters based on (i) the asymptotic normality of the maximum likelihood estimators (MLEs), and (ii) parametric bootstrap resampling technique. A Monte Carlo simulation study is carried out to examine the performance of these methods of inference. Finally, a numerical example is presented in order to illustrate all the methods of inference developed here.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.385 · 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

Citations43
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication in Statistics- Theory and MethodsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207