A Composite Likelihood Method for the Analysis of Multivariate Survival Data: An Application to a PBDE Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When dealing with multivariate survival data, featuring the association structure is a key difference from the univariate survival analysis. In this paper, we explore to use the composite likelihood framework to handle multivariate survival data, where only the lower dimensional survival distributions need to be specified. The development allows us to use available modeling schemes for bivariate survival data to characterize association structures of correlated survival times. The inference procedure is based on the pseudolikelihood which is the product of the lower dimensional bivariate distributions. The proposed estimation procedure is assessed through simulation studies. As a genuine application, we apply the composite likelihood inference procedure to analyze the data from the polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) study, where four types of PBDE congeners are available. The associations among the four PBDE congeners, and the relationships between the covariates and the PBDE congeners are of interest. The result shows that there is strong association among the concentrations of the four PBDE congeners, and statistically significant predictors on the concentrations of the four PBDE congeners are identified.
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 | 0.025 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".