Validity and efficiency in analyzing ordinal responses with missing observations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article addresses issues in creating public‐use data files in the presence of missing ordinal responses and subsequent statistical analyses of the dataset by users. The authors propose a fully efficient fractional imputation (FI) procedure for ordinal responses with missing observations. The proposed imputation strategy retrieves the missing values through the full conditional distribution of the response given the covariates and results in a single imputed data file that can be analyzed by different data users with different scientific objectives. Two most critical aspects of statistical analyses based on the imputed data set, validity and efficiency , are examined through regression analysis involving the ordinal response and a selected set of covariates. It is shown through both theoretical development and simulation studies that, when the ordinal responses are missing at random, the proposed FI procedure leads to valid and highly efficient inferences as compared to existing methods. Variance estimation using the fractionally imputed data set is also discussed. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 48: 138–151; 2020 © 2019 Statistical Society of 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it