MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907944377 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11477

A new integrated likelihood for estimating population size in dependent dual‐record system

2018· article· en· W2907944377 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCensus and Population Estimation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorIdentifiabilityLikelihood functionComputer sciencePrior probabilityBayesian probabilityDual (grammatical number)Population sizePopulationStatisticsMachine learningEconometricsMathematicsEstimation theoryArtificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Efficient estimation of the population size from dependent dual‐record system (DRS) remains a statistical challenge in the capture‐recapture type experiment. Owing to the non‐identifiability of the suitable time‐behavioural response variation model (denoted as M tb ) under DRS, few methods are developed in the Bayesian paradigm based on informative priors. Our contribution in this article is to develop a new integrated likelihood function from model M tb motivated by a novel approach developed by Severini ( 2007 ). A suitable weight function on the nuisance parameter is derived with the knowledge of the direction of behavioural dependency. A pseudo‐likelihood function is constructed so that the resulting estimator possess some desirable properties including negligible prior (or weight) sensitiveness. Extensive simulations show the superior performance of our proposed method to that of the existing Bayesian methods. Moreover, the proposed estimator is easy to implement from the computational perspective. Applications to two real data sets are presented. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 46: 577–592; 2018 © 2018 Société statistique du Canada

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.262 · 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