MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788589351 · doi:10.3390/jrfm11010006

Negative Binomial Kumaraswamy-G Cure Rate Regression Model

2018· article· en· W2788589351 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amanda M. E. D’Andrea, Ricardo Rocha, Vera Tomazella, Francisco Louzada

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsNegative binomial distributionMathematicsCure rateStatisticsBinomial distributionEvent (particle physics)Binomial (polynomial)Maximum likelihoodApplied mathematicsEconometricsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In survival analysis, the presence of elements not susceptible to the event of interest is very common. These elements lead to what is called a fraction cure, cure rate, or even long-term survivors. In this paper, we propose a unified approach using the negative binomial distribution for modeling cure rates under the Kumaraswamy family of distributions. The estimation is made by maximum likelihood. We checked the maximum likelihood asymptotic properties through some simulation setups. Furthermore, we propose an estimation strategy based on the Negative Binomial Kumaraswamy-G generalized linear model. Finally, we illustrate the distributions proposed using a real data set related to health risk.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207