Joint Modeling of Multivariate Survival Data With an Application to Retirement
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
The Cox proportional hazards model has been pervasively used in many social science areas to examine the effects of covariates on timing to an event. The standard Cox model is intended to study univariate survival data where there is a singular event of interest, which can only be experienced once. However, we may additionally wish to explore a number of other complexities that are prevalent in survival data. For example, an individual may experience events of the same type more than once or may experience multiple types of events. This study introduces innovations in recurrent (repeatable) event analysis, jointly modeling several endogenous survival processes. As an example and an application, we simultaneously model two types of recurrent events in the presence of a dependent terminal event. This model not only correctly handles different types of recurrent events but also explicitly estimates the direction and magnitude of relationships between recurrences and survival. This article concludes with an example of the model to examine how the timing of retirement is associated with the risks of multiple spells of employment and childbearing. The theoretical discussions and empirical analyses suggest that the multivariate joint models have much to offer to a wide variety of substantive research areas.
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 | 0.027 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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