MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531046897 · doi:10.1002/sta4.121

Longitudinal functional additive model with continuous proportional outcomes for physical activity data

2016· article· en· W2531046897 on OpenAlexaff
Haocheng Li, Sarah Kozey Keadle, Victor Kipnis, Raymond J. Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueStat · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsVariance (accounting)Functional data analysisFunctional principal component analysisStatisticsRandom effects modelMathematicsRegressionPrincipal component analysisRegression analysisEconometricsComputer scienceMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by physical activity data obtained from the BodyMedia FIT device (www.bodymedia.com), we take a functional data approach for longitudinal studies with continuous proportional outcomes. The functional structure depends on three factors. In our three-factor model, the regression structures are specified as curves measured at various factor-points with random effects that have a correlation structure. The random curve for the continuous factor is summarized using a few important principal components. The difficulties in handling the continuous proportion variables are solved by using a quasilikelihood type approximation. We develop an efficient algorithm to fit the model, which involves the selection of the number of principal components. The method is evaluated empirically by a simulation study. This approach is applied to the BodyMedia data with 935 males and 84 consecutive days of observation, for a total of 78, 540 observations. We show that sleep efficiency increases with increasing physical activity, while its variance decreases at the same time.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207