An Extreme Value Analysis Of Advanced Age Mortality Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extreme value theory describes the behavior of random variables at extremely high or low levels. The application of extreme value theory to statistics allows us to fit models to data from the upper tail of a distribution. This paper presents a statistical analysis of advanced age mortality data, using extreme value models to quantify the upper tail of the distribution of human life spans. Our analysis focuses on mortality data from two sources. Statistics Canada publishes the annual number of deaths in Canada, broken down by angender and age. We use the deaths data from 1949 to 1997 in our analysis. The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare also publishes detailed annual mortality data, including the 10 oldest reported ages at death in each year. We analyze the Japanese data over the period from 1980 to 2000. Using the r-largest and peaks-over-threshold approaches to extreme value modeling, we fit generalized extreme value and generalized Pareto distributions to the life span data. Changes in distribution by birth cohort or over time are modeled through the use of covariates. We then evaluate the appropriateness of the fitted models and discuss reasons for their shortcomings. Finally, we use our findings to address the existence of a finite upper bound on the life span distribution and the behavior of the force of mortality at advanced ages.
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 | 0.011 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".