MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164083043 · doi:10.1111/anzs.12067

Nonparametric Shrinkage Estimation for Aalen's Additive Hazards Model

2014· article· en· W2164083043 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulkadir Hussein, Sévérien Nkurunziza, Katrina Tomanelli

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsStatisticsNonparametric statisticsEfficiencyLinear regressionNonparametric regressionMonte Carlo methodAsymptotic distributionRegressionLinear modelEconometricsApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aalen's nonparametric additive model in which the regression coefficients are assumed to be unspecified functions of time is a flexible alternative to Cox's proportional hazards model when the proportionality assumption is in doubt. In this paper, we incorporate a general linear hypothesis into the estimation of the time-varying regression coefficients. We combine unrestricted least squares estimators and estimators that are restricted by the linear hypothesis and produce James-Stein-type shrinkage estimators of the regression coefficients. We develop the asymptotic joint distribution of such restricted and unrestricted estimators and use this to study the relative performance of the proposed estimators via their integrated asymptotic distributional risks. We conduct Monte Carlo simulations to examine the relative performance of the estimators in terms of their integrated mean square errors. We also compare the performance of the proposed estimators with a recently devised LASSO estimator as well as with ridge-type estimators both via simulations and data on the survival of primary billiary cirhosis 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 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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207