MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317937388 · doi:10.1515/em-2014-0001

Model Choice Using the Deviance Information Criterion for Latent Conditional Individual-Level Models of Infectious Disease Spread

2015· article· en· W2317937388 on OpenAlex
Lorna E. Deeth, Rob Deardon, Daniel Gillis

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiologic Methods · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeviance information criterionDeviance (statistics)Latent class modelLatent variableBayesian information criterionBayesian probabilityStatisticsLatent variable modelComputer scienceMissing dataBayesian inferenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Individual-level models (ILMs) are a class of complex, statistical models that are often fitted within a Bayesian framework, and which can be suitable for modeling infectious disease spread. The deviance information criterion (DIC) is a model comparison tool that is appropriate for complex, Bayesian models, and since its development a number of variants have been proposed, including those for its application to missing data models. Here, we assessed five variants of the DIC and their application to ILMs, in particular a class of infectious disease models known as latent conditional LC-ILMs, which depend on a potentially unknown latent grouping variable for each individual in the population. The effectiveness of the traditionally defined DIC was compared to alternative DIC definitions through a simulation study, to assess which is most applicable for this class of models. Epidemic data was generated under an LC-ILM, to which both a spatial ILM (SILM) and the LC-ILM were fitted. Each variant of the DIC was then calculated for every fitted model, and the DIC values obtained for the LC-ILM were compared to those from the SILM. The results of the simulation study indicate that the DIC can be effective for model comparison within complex Bayesian models; however, the degree to which it is effective is dependent upon the variant of the DIC used and the amount of available information on the latent grouping variable.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.141
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.141
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.801
GPT teacher head0.562
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