A new estimation method for the semiparametric accelerated failure time mixture cure model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proportional hazard (PH) mixture cure model and the accelerated failure time (AFT) mixture cure model are usually used in analysing failure time data with long-term survivors. However, the semiparametric AFT mixture cure model has attracted less attention than the semiparametric PH mixture cure model because of the complexity of its estimation method. In this paper, we propose a new estimation method for the semiparametric AFT mixture cure model. This method employs the EM algorithm and the rank estimator of the AFT model to estimate the parameters of interest. The M-step in the EM algorithm, which incorporates the rank-like estimating equation, can be carried out easily using the linear programming method. To evaluate the performance of the proposed method, we conduct a simulation study. The results of the simulation study demonstrate that the proposed method performs better than the existing estimation method and the semiparametric AFT mixture cure model improves the identifiability of the parameters in comparison to the parametric AFT mixture cure model. To illustrate, we apply the model and the proposed method to a data set of failure times from bone marrow transplant patients.
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 | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".