MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955494793 · doi:10.1002/sim.8283

Dependence modeling for multi‐type recurrent events via copulas

2019· article· en· W2955494793 on OpenAlexafffund
Jooyoung Lee, Richard J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistics in Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)InferenceMultivariate statisticsEconometricsMarginal modelComputer sciencePoisson distributionMarginal likelihoodMarginal distributionStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRegression analysisRandom variableBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When several types of recurrent events may arise, interest often lies in marginal modeling and studying the nature of the dependence structure. In this paper, we propose a multivariate mixed-Poisson model with the dependence between events accommodated by type-specific random effects which are associated through use of a Gaussian copula. Such models retain marginal features with a simple interpretation, reflect the heterogeneity in risk for each type of event, and provide insight into the dependence between the different types of events. Semiparametric inference is proposed based on composite likelihood to avoid high dimensional integration. An application to a study of nutritional supplements in malnourished children is given in which the goal is to evaluate the reduction in the rate of several different kinds of infection.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.486
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

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistics in MedicineSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207