MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134974081 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11609

Interim analysis of sequential estimation‐adjusted urn models with sample size re‐estimation

2021· article· en· W3134974081 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jun Yu, Dejian Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Clinical Trials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas
KeywordsEstimatorSequential estimationSequential analysisSample size determinationMathematicsStatisticsType I and type II errorsStatisticInterimTest statisticComputer scienceInterim analysisStatistical hypothesis testingNull hypothesisAlgorithmLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Clinical trials usually involve efficient and ethical objectives. Different adaptive designs have been proposed to satisfy these needs. We combine interim analysis, the sequential estimation‐adjusted urn model (SEU), and sample size re‐estimation (SSR) in one clinical trial. We show that the asymptotic distribution, under the null hypothesis, of the proposed sequential statistic follows Brownian motion by simultaneously addressing the three sequential procedures (allocation of patients, urn composition, and sequential parameter estimators) and the sequential statistics with revised information time due to SSR. Therefore, to control the type I error rate, traditional critical values for sequential monitoring based on Brownian motion can be used for the proposed procedure. Numerical studies with three types of urn models demonstrate that our proposed approach can control the type I error rate well and also achieve efficient and ethical objectives.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.490
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.000 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsFrench-language works237,207