MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516839318 · doi:10.1002/sim.7079

Estimation for zero-inflated over-dispersed count data model with missing response

2016· article· en· W2516839318 on OpenAlexaff
Rajibul Mian, S. R. Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCount dataNegative binomial distributionMissing dataPoisson distributionZero-inflated modelExpectation–maximization algorithmStatisticsEstimatorMaximum likelihoodMathematicsZero (linguistics)OverdispersionMixture modelCensoring (clinical trials)Poisson regressionApplied mathematicsEconometricsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop estimation procedure for the parameters of a zero-inflated over-dispersed/under-dispersed count model in the presence of missing responses. In particular, we deal with a zero-inflated extended negative binomial model in the presence of missing responses. A weighted expectation maximization algorithm is used for the maximum likelihood estimation of the parameters involved. Some simulations are conducted to study the properties of the estimators. Robustness of the procedure is shown when count data follow other over-dispersed models, such as the log-normal mixture of the Poisson distribution or even from a zero-inflated Poisson model. An illustrative example and a discussion leading to some conclusions are given. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207