MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045087557 · doi:10.1080/00949655.2020.1795174

A comparison of preliminary test, Stein-type and penalty estimators in gamma regression model

2020· article· en· W3045087557 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Statistical Computation and Simulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsSubspace topologyStatisticsMonte Carlo methodRegressionExtremum estimatorM-estimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Owing to the broad applicability of gamma regression, we propose some improved estimators based on the preliminary test and Stein-type strategies to estimate the unknown parameters in a gamma regression model. These estimators are considered when it is suspected that the parameters may be restricted to a subspace of the parameter space. Two penalty estimators such as LASSO and ridge regression are also presented. An asymptotic theory for the preliminary test and Stein-type estimators is developed, and asymptotic distributional bias and asymptotic quadratic risk of the proposed estimators are obtained. Comprehensive Monte-Carlo simulation experiments are conducted. Comparisons are then made based on simulated relative efficiency to clarify the performance of the proposed estimators. Practitioners are recommended to use the positive-part Stein-type estimator since its performance is robust irrespective of the reliability of the subspace information. A real data on prostate cancer is considered to illustrate the performance of the proposed estimators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.331 · 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