A unified Bayesian framework for exact inference of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve is a widely used measure for evaluating the performance of a diagnostic test. Common approaches for inference on area under the receiver operating characteristic curve are usually based upon approximation. For example, the normal approximation based inference tends to suffer from the problem of low accuracy for small sample size. Frequentist empirical likelihood based approaches for area under the receiver operating characteristic curve estimation may perform better, but are usually conducted through approximation in order to reduce the computational burden, thus the inference is not exact. By contrast, we proposed an exact inferential procedure by adapting the empirical likelihood into a Bayesian framework and draw inference from the posterior samples of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve obtained via a Gibbs sampler. The full conditional distributions within the Gibbs sampler only involve empirical likelihoods with linear constraints, which greatly simplify the computation. To further enhance the applicability and flexibility of the Bayesian empirical likelihood, we extend our method to the estimation of partial area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, comparison of multiple tests, and the doubly robust estimation of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the presence of missing test results. Simulation studies confirm the desirable performance of the proposed methods, and a real application is presented to illustrate its usefulness.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".