MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132356668 · doi:10.1002/cjs.10001

Semiparametric inference for survival models with step process covariates

2009· article· en· W2132356668 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, Davis
KeywordsMarkov chain Monte CarloCovariateContext (archaeology)Proportional hazards modelInferenceModel selectionBayesian inferenceSurvival analysisEconometricsBayesian probabilityStatisticsSemiparametric modelParametric statisticsMathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The authors consider Bayesian methods for fitting three semiparametric survival models, incorporating time‐dependent covariates that are step functions. In particular, these are models due to Cox [Cox ( 1972 ) Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B , 34, 187–208], Prentice & Kalbfleisch and Cox & Oakes [Cox & Oakes ( 1984 ) Analysis of Survival Data , Chapman and Hall, London]. The model due to Prentice & Kalbfleisch [Prentice & Kalbfleisch ( 1979 ) Biometrics , 35, 25–39], which has seen very limited use, is given particular consideration. The prior for the baseline distribution in each model is taken to be a mixture of Polya trees and posterior inference is obtained through standard Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. They demonstrate the implementation and comparison of these three models on the celebrated Stanford heart transplant data and the study of the timing of cerebral edema diagnosis during emergency room treatment of diabetic ketoacidosis in children. An important feature of their overall discussion is the comparison of semi‐parametric families, and ultimate criterion based selection of a family within the context of a given data set. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 37: 60–79; © 2009 Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.239 · 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