Marginal analysis of bivariate mixed responses with measurement error and misclassification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bivariate responses with mixed continuous and binary variables arise commonly in applications such as clinical trials and genetic studies. Statistical methods based on jointly modeling continuous and binary variables have been available. However, such methods ignore the effects of response mismeasurement, a ubiquitous feature in applications. It has been well studied that in many settings, ignorance of mismeasurement in variables usually results in biased estimation. In this paper, we consider the setting with a bivariate outcome vector which contains a continuous component and a binary component both subject to mismeasurement. We propose estimating equation approaches to handle measurement error in the continuous response and misclassification in the binary response simultaneously. The proposed estimators are consistent and robust to certain model misspecification, provided regularity conditions. Extensive simulation studies confirm that the proposed methods successfully correct the biases resulting from the error-in-variables under various settings. The proposed methods are applied to analyze the outbred Carworth Farms White mice data arising from a genome-wide association study.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".