Bibliographic record
Abstract
The analysis of area-level aggregated summary data is common in many disciplines including epidemiology and the social sciences. Typically, Markov random field spatial models have been employed to acknowledge spatial dependence and allow data-driven smoothing. In the context of an irregular set of areas, these models always have an ad hoc element with respect to the definition of a neighborhood scheme. In this article, we exploit recent theoretical and computational advances to carry out modeling at the continuous spatial level, which induces a spatial model for the discrete areas. This approach also allows reconstruction of the continuous underlying surface, but the interpretation of such surfaces is delicate since it depends on the quality, extent and configuration of the observed data. We focus on models based on stochastic partial differential equations. We also consider the interesting case in which the aggregate data are supplemented with point data. We carry out Bayesian inference and, in the language of generalized linear mixed models, if the link is linear, an efficient implementation of the model is available via integrated nested Laplace approximations. For nonlinear links, we present two approaches: a fully Bayesian implementation using a Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithm and an empirical Bayes implementation, that is much faster and is based on Laplace approximations. We examine the properties of the approach using simulation, and then apply the model to the classic Scottish lip cancer data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".