MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986507741 · doi:10.1515/demo-2019-0018

Dependence measure for length-biased survival data using copulas

2019· article· en· W2986507741 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachid Bentoumi, Mhamed Mesfioui, Mayer Alvo

Bibliographic record

VenueDependence Modeling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsCovariateStatisticsMeasure (data warehouse)Rank correlationDependency (UML)EconometricsStatistical physicsData miningComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The linear correlation coefficient of Bravais-Pearson is considered a powerful indicator when the dependency relationship is linear and the error variate is normally distributed. Unfortunately in finance and in survival analysis the dependency relationship may not be linear. In such case, the use of rank-based measures of dependence, like Kendall’s tau or Spearman rho are recommended. In this direction, under length-biased sampling, measures of the degree of dependence between the survival time and the covariates appear to have not received much intention in the literature. Our goal in this paper, is to provide an alternative indicator of dependence measure, based on the concept of information gain, using the parametric copulas. In particular, the extension of the Kent’s [18] dependence measure to length-biased survival data is proposed. The performance of the proposed method is demonstrated through simulations studies.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.492
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.009 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDependence ModelingSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207