MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conditional Two Level Mixture with Known Mixing Proportions: Applications to School and Student Level Overweight and Obesity Data from Birmingham, England

2014· article· en· W2141493353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shakir Hussain, Mehdi AL-Alak, Ghazi Shukur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Oxford
KeywordsOverweightStatisticsMixing (physics)Bayesian probabilityMathematicsParametric statisticsOutcome (game theory)Variance (accounting)MaximizationRandom effects modelEconometricsComputer scienceBody mass indexMathematical optimizationMedicineMeta-analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two Level (TL) models allow the total variation in the outcome to be decomposed as level one and level two or ‘individual and group’ variance components. Two Level Mixture (TLM) models can be used to explore unobserved heterogeneity that represents different qualitative relationships in the outcome. In this paper, we extend the standard TL model by introducing constraints to guide the TLM algorithm towards a more appropriate data partitioning. Our constraints-based methods combine the mixing proportions estimated by parametric Expectation Maximization (EM) of the outcome and the random component from the TL model. This forms new two level mixing conditional (TLMc) approach by means of prior information. The new framework advantages are: 1. avoiding trial and error tactic used by TLM for choosing the best BIC (Bayesian Information Criterion), 2. permitting meaningful parameter estimates for distinct classes in the coefficient space and finally 3. allowing smaller residual variances. We show the benefit of our method using overweight and obesity from Body Mass Index (BMI) for students in year 6. We apply these methods on hierarchical BMI data to estimate student multiple deprivation and school Club effects.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.034
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207