MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152675118 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11131

Regression analysis for a summed missing data problem under an outcome‐dependent sampling scheme

2012· article· en· W2152675118 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jieli Ding, Yanyan Liu, David B. Peden, Steven R. Kleeberger, Haibo Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMissing dataOutcome (game theory)EstimatorSimple random sampleUnobservableStatisticsSampling designStratified samplingCovariateEconometricsComputer scienceSampling (signal processing)Sample size determinationRegression analysisData setMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, we consider a regression analysis for a missing data problem in which the variables of primary interest are unobserved under a general biased sampling scheme, an outcome‐dependent sampling (ODS) design. We propose a semiparametric empirical likelihood method for accessing the association between a continuous outcome response and unobservable interesting factors. Simulation study results show that ODS design can produce more efficient estimators than the simple random design of the same sample size. We demonstrate the proposed approach with a data set from an environmental study for the genetic effects on human lung function in COPD smokers. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 40: 282–303; 2012 © 2012 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.

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)0.089
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.158
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0890.158
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.154 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207