A new integrated likelihood for estimating population size in dependent dual‐record system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 Mtb) 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 Mtb 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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".