MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118822931 · doi:10.13052/jrss0974-8024.13246

Competing Hazards Regression Parameter Estimation Under Different Informative Priors

2021· article· en· W3118822931 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reliability and Statistical Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrior probabilityProportional hazards modelStatisticsBayes' theoremBayesian probabilityPoint estimationEconometricsParametric statisticsRegressionRegression analysisHazard ratioComputer scienceMathematicsConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the analysis of survival data, cause specific quantities of competing risks get considerable attention as compared to latent failure time approach. This article focuses on parametric regression analysis of survival data using cause specific hazard function with Burr type XII distribution as a baseline model. We obtained maximum likelihood and Bayes estimates of cumulative cause specific hazard functions under competing risk setup. For Bayesian point of view we proposed a class of informative priors for parameters to observe the comprehensive compatibility and their effectiveness under two different loss functions. The appropriateness of model is measured by the simulation study. Finally, we illustrate the proposed methodologies using bone marrow transplant data from the Princess Margaret Hospital Ontario, 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.332 · 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