MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471220563 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11291

Variable selection for frailty transformation models with application to diabetic complications

2016· article· en· W2471220563 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Xu Liu, Xinyuan Song, Shangyu Xie, Yong Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Transformation (genetics)Variable (mathematics)Feature selectionComputer scienceDiabetes mellitusMedicineArtificial intelligenceMathematicsBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article focuses on variable selection in the context of gamma frailty transformation models for multivariate survival times. We propose a method based on a nonconcave penalty function to select relevant regression predictors and simultaneously estimate model parameters and nonparametric functions. Our procedure performs as well as the oracle one in which the true model is assumed to be known. We conduct simulation studies to demonstrate the performance of the proposed methodology. We apply our method to a case study based on the Hong Kong Diabetes Registry, and obtain new insights on the risk factors of cardiovascular–renal complications for type 2 diabetic patients.The Canadian Journal of Statistics44: 375–394; 2016 © 2016 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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.127 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207