MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Smooth Test of Goodness-of-Fit for the Weibull Distribution: An Application to an HIV Retention Data

2017· article· en· W2605795799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Collins Odhiambo, John Odhiambo, Bernard Omolo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoodness of fitWeibull distributionStatisticsMathematicsEmpirical distribution functionTest (biology)Anderson–Darling testStatistical hypothesis testingKolmogorov–Smirnov test

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we fit the two-parameter Weibull distribution to an HIV retention data and assess the fit using a smooth test of goodness-of-fit. The smooth test described here is a score test and is derived as an extension of the Neyman’s smooth test. Simulations are conducted to compare the power of the smooth test with the power of each of three empirical goodness-of-fit tests for the Weibull distribution. Results show that the smooth tests of order three and four are more powerful than the three empirical goodness-of-fit tests. For validation, we used retention data from an HIV care setting in Kenya.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207